Case law

Gersten v. Rundle

833 F. Supp. 906 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 14, 1993

The case dealt most directly with whether the qualified immunity afforded this defendant in her capacity as a public official exempted her from defending the suit. … Consequently, regardless of the issue of qualified immunity, the court stated, the plaintiff had “failed to allege any act for which he would be entitled to relief under § 1983.” Id.

Whitfield v. Thompson

165 F. Supp. 3d 1227 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 25, 2016

immunity. … Qualified Immunity The defendants additionally argue that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law based upon qualified immunity.

Watkins v. Sergeant M. Bigwood

District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 30, 2020

Qualified immunity defense generally “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established … As a result, to overcome qualified immunity, Watkins bears the burden to demonstrate that they violated a clearly established constitutional right.

Harris v. Dugger

715 F. Supp. 364 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 27, 1989

Faulkner, 653 F.Supp. 965, 971-72 (N.D.Ind.1987). (2) whether Rastafarianism is an established religion recognized by the First Amendment. … established for purposes of determining the defendant’s claim of qualified immunity.

McDowell v. Gonzalez

District Court, S.D. Florida · Oct 3, 2019

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … “Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.” Id.

McGrail & Rowley v. Babbitt

986 F. Supp. 1386 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 9, 1997

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The government argues that the individual defendants are immune from an award of money damages pursuant to the doctrine of qualified immunity. … It is established that “government officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Rosner v. United States

231 F. Supp. 2d 1202 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 26, 2002

The Implied-in~Fact Contract for Bailment The Government contends that the Court clearly erred when it refused to dismiss the Plaintiffs’ implied-in-fact contract for bailment claim. … However, to prevail on the merits the Plaintiffs must be able to establish that all contract elements have been satisfied.

Barr v. Denmark

District Court, S.D. Florida · May 28, 2024

conduct violates a clearly established statutory or constitutional right.” … Thus, “[t]o survive a motion to dismiss based upon qualified immunity, the plaintiff must have alleged sufficient facts to support a finding of a constitutional violation of a clearly established law.” Chandler v.

Cortes v. Jordan

504 F. Supp. 2d 1318 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 21, 2007

The Eleventh Circuit held that although the complaint was “clearly subject to dismissal upon a plea of judicial immunity,” judicial immunity is an affirmative defense that does not divest the court of subject matter jurisdiction … Attorney charged with defending Judge Jordan and Magistrate Judge Torres to formally file a pleading to raise the affirmative defense of judicial immunity— which is clearly available — would thwart the criminal prosecution

O'Barry v. United States

915 F. Supp. 345 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 19, 1995

SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY Barring waiver by statute, the doctrine of sovereign immunity protects the government from suit. 6 Congress waived immunity for, inter alia, certain torts that occur on the high seas. … As such, the doctrine of sovereign immunity does not preclude Plaintiffs’ suit. III.

Jackson v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc.

203 F. Supp. 2d 1367 · District Court, S.D. Florida · May 21, 2002

Lunn and Nurse Boyd-Little were qualified to perform their jobs, and their testimony is supported by the record. Carnival has submitted documents establishing that Dr. … Lunn was not qualified to perform the job function for which he was hired. In fact, all of the evidence establishing Dr. Lunn’s academic and professional qualifications and work experience are contained in his file.

Freeman v. Fuller

623 F. Supp. 1224 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 20, 1985

The pertinent caselaw clearly holds that a judge is absolutely immune from liability in a lawsuit like the one at bar, provided that certain factual circumstances are present. … Rather, state and federal prisons have established procedures whereby inmates can present their grievances which arise from these management decisions.

Harris v. Ivax Corp.

998 F. Supp. 1449 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 30, 1998

Provided that they satisfy one of the two conditions discussed below, such projections are clearly immunized by the Reform Act’s safe harbor. 2. … Such was clearly the case here.

Redding v. Nova Southeastern University, Inc.

165 F. Supp. 3d 1274 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 26, 2016

, Nova fails to meet its burden of establishing an absence of evidence that Redding was qualified at the time she requested accommodations for taking her make-up exams, and the Court considers these claims further. … This is clearly a mistake. Section 12132 is part of Title II of the ADA, not Title III. Title II applies to public entities.

Jackson v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.

181 F. Supp. 2d 1345 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 17, 2001

As has been recently stated, in Mazzoni “[t]he Supreme Court of Florida did not examine the possibility of immunity for litigation conduct, and to say that they impliedly denied the possibility of immunity in these cases … Under Florida’s RICO laws, "crimes committed at the same time cannot qualify as separate incidents for purposes of proving racketeering conduct ....” State v.

Quintero

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 1, 2026

But “[b]ecause dicta cannot establish law—period—it certainly cannot clearly establish law for purposes of defeating a qualified immunity defense.” Stalley v. … Without clearly established law prohibiting officers from conducting a knock-and-talk in the presence of a “No Trespassing” sign, Officer Lopez is entitled to qualified immunity.

Martinez v. Republic of Cuba

708 F. Supp. 2d 1298 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 28, 2010

immunity. 1 Id. … But satisfying a FSIA exception is not simply a precondition for suing or attaching the property of a foreign state; it is a precondition for establishing subject matter jurisdiction over an action against a foreign state

Sunrise Village Mobile Home Park v. Phillips & Jordan, Inc.

960 F. Supp. 283 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 4, 1996

The authority clearly leaves room for agency judgment on which property should be cleared, whether to include private property in the cleanup, and whether to use federal instrumentalities or to make grants to states, local … No facts beyond the bare allegations of the complaint are required in this case to establish that the actions challenged context of debris removal implicate the second prong of the discretionary exception test.

Baker v. Chandler

161 F. Supp. 2d 1372 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 19, 2001

Notably, even if Baker could ultimately show that his speech was on a matter of "public concern,” Defendant Chandler, the only defendant sued in his individual capacity, would still be entitled to qualified immunity on the … To defeat a claim for qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show that the federal right he accuses the defendant of violating was "clearly established” when the defendant acted. See, e.g., Martin v.

Jean-Baptiste v. Jones

District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 2, 2019

To circumvent qualified immunity, then, the Plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that Officer Jones violated his “clearly established” constitutional right to be free from the excessive use of force. … The Eleventh Circuit concluded that the officer was “entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that the amount of force he used outside the restaurant was unlawful.”