Case law

Steen v. City of Pensacola

809 F. Supp. 2d 1342 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Aug 22, 2011

Qualified Immunity “The qualified immunity defense ‘shields government agents from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … I will simply assume arguendo that there was a constitutional violation and proceed to the second step of the qualified immunity analysis. 2. Was the right “clearly established” at the time of the violation?

KAISER v. DIXON

District Court, N.D. Florida · Oct 24, 2024

Additionally, FDC Defendants raise the defense of qualified immunity in their motion to dismiss. The throughline requirement in each of these areas is the presence of a constitutional violation. … to the next step of determining if a constitutional right was clearly established”).

DE MONTALVO v. DIXON

District Court, N.D. Florida · Oct 17, 2024

FDC Defendants also assert qualified immunity. ECF No. 32 at 24-25. III. … proceed to the next step of determining if a constitutional right was clearly established”).

Tunnell v. Crosby

657 F. Supp. 2d 1263 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Aug 24, 2009

This is so because the motions to dismiss plainly must be granted anyway based on qualified immunity. Qualified immunity protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” Malley v. … The defendants thus have qualified immunity. See, e.g., Anderson v.

Scherer v. Davis

543 F. Supp. 4 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Jun 7, 1982

Qualified Immunity. As public officials, defendants Davis and Beach enjoy a qualified immunity which limits their liability for damages. Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232 , 94 S.Ct. 1683 , 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974); Cruz v. … Plaintiff suggests that this court should adhere to a recent Fifth Circuit decision which held that officials were not entitled to qualified immunity when they violated clearly established state law. Wiliams v.

Harrell v. Campbell

482 F. Supp. 2d 1373 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Mar 20, 2007

has no qualified immunity. … Rather than an issue about the clearly established law, the issue in the case at bar is the facts.

Henry Co. Homes, Inc. v. Curb

548 F. Supp. 2d 1281 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Mar 11, 2008

It is well settled that “[qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … It is therefore unnecessary to determine whether under qualified immunity analysis those rights were clearly established at the time.

McCurry v. Moore

242 F. Supp. 2d 1167 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Nov 21, 2002

Macon County, 1 F.3d 1558, 1563 (11th Cir.1993) (denying qualified immunity defense and finding there was a clearly established right under the Fourteenth Amendment to not be falsely imprisoned); Douthit v. … Indeed, in 1993 the Eleventh Circuit reversed the granting of a qualified immunity defense in Cannon and found the law to have been clearly established by 1980 based on Douthit. Cannon, 1 F.3d at 1564-65 .

MENDOZA v. DIXON

District Court, N.D. Florida · Sep 5, 2023

Qualified immunity is a shield from liability for government actors, prohibiting “civil damages for torts committed while performing discretionary duties unless their conduct violates a clearly established statutory or … One way for Plaintiff to show that the law is clearly established is to point to a “broader, clearly established principle [that] should control the novel facts [of the] situation.” Terrell v.

Schultz v. Hall

365 F. Supp. 2d 1218 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Apr 15, 2005

of their conduct was not clearly established at the time. … Plaintiff also contends that the force employed against her cannot be described as de min-imis and that the deputies conduct violated clearly established law, which precludes granting them qualified immunity.

Harrell v. Campbell

482 F. Supp. 2d 1368 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Mar 9, 2007

If, as the Eleventh Circuit held in Vaughan , an officer is not entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity under that clearly established law when he shoots into a truck occupied by unknown suspects, reasonably … Deputy Goodman asserts those convictions establish the validity of his qualified immunity defense. Deputy Goodman invokes Heck v.

Olson v. Stewart

240 F. Supp. 3d 1251 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Mar 8, 2017

Rugg, 221 F.3d 1283, 1294 (11th Cir. 2000) (holding that a district court’s denial of qualified immunity is immediately appealable only if it “pres-entís] a legal question concerning a clearly established federal right that … Olson as the nonmoving party, he can assert that there was no clearly established law showing that this arrest was improper.

Stoddard v. Florida Board of Bar Examiners

509 F. Supp. 2d 1117 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Dec 22, 2006

qualified immunity). … Qualified Immunity Defendants sued in their individual capacities do not have Eleventh Amendment immunity, but they do have qualified immunity.

Welch v. THEODORIDES-BUSTLE

677 F. Supp. 2d 1283 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Jan 5, 2010

Qualified Immunity The defendants assert that, as public officials or employees, they have qualified immunity. Qualified immunity protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” … Thus a public officer or employee may be held individually liable only if his or her conduct violates clearly established law.

Kilpatrick v. United States

578 F. Supp. 2d 1339 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Sep 26, 2008

Qualified Immunity As an initial matter, Defendant Roegner asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … To defeat qualified immunity, it must be shown that 1) the plaintiffs constitutional rights were violated and 2) that those rights were clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. Holloman ex rel.

National Coalition for Students With Disabilities v. Bush

170 F. Supp. 2d 1205 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Feb 20, 2001

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, officials cannot be held liable unless their actions violated clearly established law. … Plaintiffs have not, however, identified any other clearly established law that defendants allegedly violated.

Crenshaw v. City of Defuniak Springs

891 F. Supp. 1548 · District Court, N.D. Florida · May 12, 1995

Qualified Immunity Defendant Standley maintains that he is entitled to qualified immunity, as he did not violate clearly established constitutional law. I agree. … Two questions of law must be decided in completing the second part of the qualified immunity analysis: First, the court must ascertain whether the legal norm allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of the defendant

ALPHONSE v. WHITE

District Court, N.D. Florida · Jul 1, 2025

immunity argument as to those claims. … Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 736 (2002) (“The threshold inquiry a court must undertake in qualified immunity analysis is whether plaintiff’s allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation.”).

Cropper v. United States

81 F. Supp. 81 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Nov 22, 1948

The evidence in the case clearly established plaintiff's right to recover for the injuries suffered by him, if this court has jurisdiction of the suit. … The evidence also clearly shows that Robbins had deviated from the instructions given him in the morning when he left the Army Base with the staff car.

Wenzel v. Bankhead

351 F. Supp. 2d 1316 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Dec 14, 2004

Bankhead invokes the doctrine of qualified immunity, which protects public officials from personal liability unless they violate clearly established law. … The doctrine of qualified immunity, with its insistence, on “clearly established” law as a prerequisite to personal liability *1326 of public officials, is designed for cases of precisely this type.