Case law

Marx v. Gumbinner

716 F. Supp. 1434 · District Court, S.D. Florida · May 19, 1989

Qualified Immunity Even if probable cause did not exist, Defendants are still entitled to qualified immunity because those Defendants reasonably believed such probable cause existed. … Accordingly, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for Plaintiff’s arrest. C.

Robinson v. Brown

987 F. Supp. 1470 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 13, 1997

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY AND EXCESSIVE FORCE. (i). Qualified Immunity. 6. The Supreme Court has developed an objective-reasonableness test for evaluating actions involving a government official’s claim of qualified immunity. … of that clearly-established law.

Dominguez v. METROPOLITAN MIAMI-DADE COUNTY

359 F. Supp. 2d 1323 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 23, 2004

to qualified immunity from suit. … that the public actor has violated a clearly established constitutional right.

Salgado v. City of West Miami

85 F. Supp. 3d 1332 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 4, 2015

The “Clearly Established” Inquiry Although Plaintiffs have shown enough facts to support a constitutional violation, Baron would still be entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct did not violate clearly established law … Baron is not entitled to qualified immunity. IV.

Wordley v. San Miguel

915 F. Supp. 2d 1312 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 3, 2013

Qualified immunity offers government officials sued in their individual capacity complete protection as long as their conduct violates no clearly established law of which a reasonable person would have known. Hoyt v. … Under this test, the law is clearly established, and qualified immunity can be overcome, only if the standards set forth in Graham and our own case law “inevitably lead every reasonable officer in [the defendant’s] position

Byford v. Stephens

299 F. Supp. 2d 1253 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 7, 2003

“Clearly Established” Law In the , alternative, even if it could be said that Officer Stephens lacked arguable probable cause for Plaintiffs arrest, this Court finds that he is still entitled to qualified immunity because … For an asserted right to be clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity, “its contours ‘must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.

Spechler v. Tobin

591 F. Supp. 2d 1350 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 10, 2008

Qualified Immunity The qualified immunity defense may be raised and addressed on a motion to dismiss, and will be granted if the complaint “fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.” … Accordingly, the allegations in the complaint do not establish an access to courts claim and the Chief Judge is entitled to qualified immunity. c.

EH ex rel. Moore v. City of Miramar

111 F. Supp. 3d 1307 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 19, 2015

The Eleventh Circuit found that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity since the use of deadly force was reasonable under the facts and circumstances of the case and there was no clearly established law at the time … established prong of the qualified immunity analysis.

Marrero v. City of Hialeah

581 F. Supp. 1207 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 8, 1984

Stated another way, the Marreros can only defeat Rashkind’s qualified immunity by showing that the constitutional right allegedly infringed by [him] was clearly established at the time of [his] conduct, [that he] knew or … To defeat Rashkind’s qualified immunity, the Marreros must demonstrate the existence “of clearly established judicial decisions that make his action[s during the seizure] unconstitutional,” Rheaume, 666 F.2d at 930 , or the

Lippman v. City of Miami

719 F. Supp. 2d 1370 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 16, 2010

“[Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities as long as their conduct violates no clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Assuming the plaintiff can establish both parts of the test, the government officials are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Fernandez v. City of Cooper City

207 F. Supp. 2d 1371 · District Court, S.D. Florida · May 10, 2002

The doctrine of qualified immunity “protects government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability if their conduct violates no ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of *1376 which … Qualified immunity recognizes that, "where an official’s duties legitimately require action in which clearly established rights are not implicated, the public interest ■ may be better served by action taken ‘with independence

St. Louis v. Sands

401 F. Supp. 2d 1351 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 8, 2005

Because nothing on the face of Plaintiffs Amended Complaint demonstrates that Defendant acted with racial animus to de *1360 prive Plaintiff of a clearly established § 1981 right, Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity … Plaintiff has thus failed to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right and Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs claim for the violation of his First amendment rights. 9 *1363

Cordoves v. Miami-Dade County

92 F. Supp. 3d 1221 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 12, 2015

based upon qualified immunity.” … Qualified Immunity “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 of which

Stephens v. Broward Sheriff's Office

84 F. Supp. 3d 1327 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 10, 2014

For an official to lose qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show both that a constitutional violation occurred, and that the violation was of a *1337 clearly established, right. See id. … Because the Court finds that the Plaintiff has not brought forth sufficient evidence to show that a constitutional violation occurred, it need not address the "clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity defense

Ghandour v. CITY OF MIAMI DADE

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 9, 2024

Moreover, Plaintiff is correct that the right Davis allegedly violated was clearly established. (See Resp. 7–8). … Accordingly, Davis is entitled to qualified immunity as to Count VI. C.

Sosa v. Hames

581 F. Supp. 2d 1254 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Oct 7, 2008

Therefore, the burden shifts to Sosa to demonstrate that Defendants violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right to overcome the qualified immunity defense. … a violation was clearly established.

Lawson v. City of Miami Beach

908 F. Supp. 2d 1285 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 11, 2012

Moreover, they raise the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. The Court will address the qualified immunity argument first. … As a result, “unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” Allen v.

Pablo Hernandez v. City of Miami

302 F. Supp. 2d 1373 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 13, 2004

Is Officer Perez Entitled to Qualified Immunity? … address the use of deadly force on pretrial detainees, and law was therefore not clearly established); Montoute v.

Rice-Lamar v. City of Fort Lauderdale

54 F. Supp. 2d 1137 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 25, 1998

Qualified Immunity Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … Therefore, based on the facts construed in the light most favorable to Lamar, the individual defendants are clearly entitled to qualified immunity. See Martin v.

Rowe v. City of Fort Lauderdale

8 F. Supp. 2d 1369 · District Court, S.D. Florida · May 6, 1998

protections of absolute and/or qualified immunity. … Then the burden shifts to Rowe to demonstrate that their conduct violated clearly established law. Id.