Case law

Blackman v. Butler

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Dec 9, 2019

Qualified Immunity Defendants object to Judge Sison’s conclusion that they are not entitled to qualified immunity on Blackman’s due process claim with regard to his … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009) (to determine whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, a court must consider whether there is a violation of a constitutional right and whether that right was clearly established

Stinde v. Schoenbeck

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 27, 2022

In general, qualified immunity shields “government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Walker, 865 F.3d 544 (7th Cir. 2017) (denying qualified immunity to jail staff who were deliberately indifferent to plaintiff’s risk of suicide, holding that qualified immunity need not be litigated and established disease

Jones v. Muniz

349 F. Supp. 3d 377 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Nov 21, 2018

Qualified immunity generally protects government officials when performing discretionary functions, *383 such as arrests, "from liability for civil damages" if "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity is a question of law, asking whether the right at issue was "clearly established in a more particularized, and hence more relevant, sense: The contours of the right must

Dixon v. Baldwin

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 25, 2023

Qualified Immunity Finally, Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages when “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

Hill v. Quigley

336 F. Supp. 3d 283 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Aug 28, 2018

Plaintiff also argues that references to "immunity" within the charge improperly invited the jury to speculate on the question of qualified immunity. The word "immunity" appeared twice in my charge. … The reference to "immunity" did not muddle the applicable legal standards. The doctrine of qualified immunity is a question of law for the Court, see Hunter v.

Hunter v. Illinois Department of Corrections

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 28, 2023

Meeks is not entitled to qualified immunity. See Pearson v. … clearly established at the time of the defendant’s misconduct).

Cox v. Thompson

635 F. Supp. 594 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 12, 1986

First plaintiff contends that the qualified immunity doctrine does not apply in this case because the rights asserted by the plaintiff are clearly established constitutional rights. … QUALIFIED IMMUNITY DEFENSE “Government officials performing discretionary functions, as here, are shielded from liability for damages in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit unless their conduct violated clearly established statutory

Collins v. City of N.Y.

295 F. Supp. 3d 350 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 29, 2018

The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was 'clearly *363 established' at the time of the violation." Tolan v. … immunity was not clearly established."

Doss v. Gilkey

649 F. Supp. 2d 905 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jul 28, 2009

The defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity because: a. … clearly established.

Monroe v. Gould

372 F. Supp. 3d 197 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 14, 2019

Qualified immunity shields government officials whose conduct "does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v. … "The issues on qualified immunity are: (1) whether plaintiff has shown facts making out violation of a constitutional right; (2) if so, whether that right was 'clearly established'; and (3) even if the right was 'clearly

Cunningham v. Snyder

472 F. Supp. 2d 1023 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 19, 2006

To defeat a qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that “the legal norms allegedly violated by the defendant were clearly established at the time of the challenged actions or, ... the law … See Greenberg, 840 F.2d at 472 (quoting Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 ) (observing that the principle underlying the doctrine of qualified immunity is that “[i]f the law at the time was not clearly established,

Bah v. City of N.Y.

319 F. Supp. 3d 698 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 21, 2018

Nevertheless, he is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct did not violate clearly established law. … On qualified immunity, the officer's actions are assessed in view of the clearly established law at the time the officer acted. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 , 244, 129 S.Ct. 808 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009).

Galarza v. Monti

327 F. Supp. 3d 594 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Aug 6, 2018

For the plaintiff to overcome the qualified immunity defense, he must demonstrate that he possessed a clearly established constitutional right. … Therefore, the plaintiff can only overcome a claim of qualified immunity if it was clearly established at the time of the arrest that the plaintiff had a right to be free from a First Amendment retaliatory arrest even where

Heard v. City of N.Y.

319 F. Supp. 3d 687 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Aug 10, 2018

, the officer may still be shielded from liability for false arrest under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions, such as arrests, "from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Thomas v. Walton

461 F. Supp. 2d 786 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 19, 2006

In general, of course, a government officer is entitled to qualified immunity if a reasonable officer could have believed that his or her conduct was constitutional in light of the clearly established law and the information … All of the constitutional violations alleged by Thomas implicate clearly established constitutional rights, making summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity improper. *798 As discussed, Count 2, the remaining portion

Black Lives Matter v. Town of Clarkstown

354 F. Supp. 3d 313 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Nov 14, 2018

Qualified Immunity Defendants Sullivan and Cole-Hatchard each assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Consequently, "qualified immunity shields ... officials from suit 'unless [1] the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that [2] was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.' " Terebesi v

Munson v. Gaetz

957 F. Supp. 2d 951 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jul 17, 2013

However, the Court GRANTS in part Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. Moving Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualiñed Immunity “Generally, qualified immunity protects government agents from liability when their actions do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

Rodriguez v. City of N.Y.

291 F. Supp. 3d 396 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 5, 2018

A valid qualified immunity defense can foreclose liability under § 1983. … "Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

Golian v. N.Y.C. Admin. for Children Servs.

282 F. Supp. 3d 718 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 16, 2017

A defendant is entitled to qualified immunity in a § 1983 case "if either (1) their conduct did not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known, or (2) it was objectively reasonable to … believe that their acts did not violate these clearly established rights."

Williams v. Southern Illinois Riverboat/Casino Cruises, Inc.

553 F. Supp. 2d 1041 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jan 1, 2008

Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials from liability for civil damages where their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … The Court need not consider, then, whether the constitutional rights at issue were clearly established on August 27, 2005. Eberhart is entitled to qualified immunity, and summary judgment, on Count III. B.