Case law

Royal v. Payne

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 6, 2022

Defendants are Entitled to Qualified Immunity 1. … The Right Plaintiff Seeks to Vindicate is not Clearly Established Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory

Walton v. Gordon

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 24, 2024

under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … entitled to qualified immunity

Wright v. Young

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 28, 2020

Officer Young also argues he is entitled to qualified immunity. “A public official defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless two disqualifying criteria are met. … Second, that right must have been clearly established at the time of the violation.” Day v. Wooten, 947 F.3d 453, 460 (7th Cir. 2020).

McCormick v. Goebel

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 7, 2023

Defendants have argued they are entitled to qualified immunity, and Mr. McCormick’s response brief is grossly inadequate to refute their qualified immunity defense. … In lieu of making a robust argument identifying a clearly established right violated by the children’s placements, Mr.

Caldwell v. Patston

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 28, 2021

on their defense of qualified immunity. … The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Gibson v. Block

619 F. Supp. 1572 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 23, 1985

Under this program, qualified farmers can receive payment in the form of grain stored by the government in return for not growing crops. … Clearly, this is a suit against the United States, although it only names the Secretary. The United States has waived its sovereign immunity in certain limited respects.

Wehrly v. American Motors Sales Corp.

678 F. Supp. 1366 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 12, 1988

Second, the plaintiff’s evaluations clearly show that while he might have been qualified for *1375 other kinds of promotions, he was not qualified for the city manager’s position. 11 H. … While the plaintiff was clearly qualified as a district sales manager, he was not qualified as a city sales manager.

Brown v. Boyn (In Re Brown)

86 B.R. 944 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 25, 1988

When the district court reviews a bankruptcy court’s decision on appeal, it must adopt the bankruptcy court’s findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. … The Indiana Code and Indiana cases recognize and clearly define a spendthrift trust and its requirements. Pursuant to Ind.

Williams v. Crown Point City of

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 30, 2023

Clearly Established Law Thus, the Court turns to the qualified immunity inquiry of whether the law clearly established at the time that it was unreasonable for Officer Eldridge … For purposes of qualified immunity, the law is clearly established on an excessive force claim if a plaintiff “identif[ies] a closely analogous case that established a right to be free from the type of force the police

Ridlen v. Four County Counseling Center

809 F. Supp. 1343 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 24, 1992

Clearly much has transpired in the area of state action jurisprudence since the Hall court rendered the aforementioned opinion in 1980. … There are undeveloped issues relating to the immunity of certain defendants as well. It is correct that the individual physicians, although perhaps not Four County itself, would have qualified immunity. See Hedge v.

McGuire - RESTRICTED - ACCEPT NO FILINGS v. Neal

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 14, 2020

“Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability when performing discretionary functions so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … To overcome a qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must show the deprivation of a constitutional right and must also “show that the right was clearly established at the time of the violation.” Id.

Ellis v. Pryor

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 16, 2020

clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … To overcome a qualified immunity defense, “a plaintiff must show the deprivation of a constitutional right, and must also show that the right was clearly established at the time of the violation.” Walker v.

Swann v. Garrett

811 F. Supp. 1336 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 16, 1992

Sovereign Immunity In its Motion to Dismiss, the Defendant argues that Swann has failed to establish the waiver of sovereign immunity by the United States, thus denying this Court jurisdiction. … Swann has the burden of meeting this standard with “cogent and clearly convincing evidence.” Cooper v. United States, 203 Cl.Ct. 300 , 304 (1973).

Ervin v. Brown

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 14, 2025

right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … Officers conducting searches are entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law “does not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment.” Id. at 243–44.

Renee v. Neal

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 2, 2020

In evaluating a qualified immunity defense at summary judgment, the court considers (1) whether the facts, taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, show that the official violated a clearly established … Renee had a clearly established First Amendment right to wear makeup and purchase female hygiene items, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.

Rutledge v. Indiana Department of Correction

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 29, 2025

The prison officers also argue qualified immunity. … The defense of qualified immunity “shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Coleman v. Frantz

593 F. Supp. 28 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 12, 1984

Plaintiff also brings pendent state claims, alleging false imprisonment, unnecessary rigor in arrest, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligence. 1 Qualified good faith immunity is available to enforcement … Public officials acting in their official capacities “are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Grubbs v. United States

581 F. Supp. 536 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 29, 1984

This is most clearly illustrated in Government’s Exhibit Number 4, “Mayo Clinic Proceedings”, dated November of 1975. … The evidence clearly demonstrates that it is not such a case.

Roberts v. Hochstetler

592 F. Supp. 703 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 12, 1983

Qualified good faith immunity is available to police officers acting in their official capacities. Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 , 87 S.Ct. 1213 , 18 L.Ed.2d 288 (1967). See also Procunier v. … Public officials acting in their official capacities “are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Hullett v. Dreessen

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 27, 2024

To determine whether qualified immunity applies, the court must decide: (1) whether the facts the plaintiff has alleged make out a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether the right at issue was “clearly established … a defense of qualified immunity.”