Case law

McNeil v. Indiana Parole Dept

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 23, 2021

Officer Griffin alternatively argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity. “Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are liable for civil damages . . . … 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 right

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.”

Hartsell v. Dietz

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

“To overcome a defendant’s invocation of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged … Hartsell’s clearly established right. See Green, 868 F.3d at 633. As a result, the ultimate decision on Defendants’ qualified immunity defense depends on and cannot be separated from factual disputes regarding Mr.

VanDalsen v. Roswarksi

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 19, 2024

And even if she had, it was clear that the defendants would be entitled to qualified immunity, because any such right was not clearly established at the time of the alleged violations. [DE 51; see DE 37; DE 41; DE 43.] … Van Dalsen’s constitutional rights (as opposed to those of her son) and that the defendants would be immune from damages for any such constitutional deprivation under the doctrine of qualified immunity.

Thomas v. Brown

824 F. Supp. 160 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 19, 1993

A suit against a state official in his personal capacity is not barred by the Eleventh Amendment — although the state official may be able to assert personal immunity defenses (i.e., qualified immunity) and a damage award … The long duration of a cruel prison condition may make it easier to establish knowledge and hence some form of intent, cf. Canton v.

Edward Charles Johnson v. Indiana Department of Child Services, et al.

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 25, 2026

In response, Johnson claims immunity does not apply if a state official violates a clearly established right, such as the right to due process. [DE 30 at 2.] … His response seems to be alluding to the doctrine of qualified immunity, which “protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Clark v. DeKalb County Sheriff

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 3, 2020

clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … As for whether the rights here are clearly established, the notion that they were is properly encapsulated in Bennett v.

Lowder v. Marshall County Sheriff's Department

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 5, 2025

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 … That then leaves only the question of qualified immunity for Officer Tapia, and in particular whether the constitutional right here was clearly established. See McGee, 55 F.4th at 572- 73.

Estate of Sullivan v. United States

777 F. Supp. 695 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 16, 1991

. § 14.4 (a)(3) had authority to request information concerning the decedent’s survivors and could have easily identified qualified claimants. … health care provider” for purposes of the states’ medical malpractice acts which limit the availability of the cap to such “qualified health care providers”.

Armalin v. Grant County Jail

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 22, 2019

To defeat the qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must show: (1) that the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time so that it would have been clear to a … Moving onward then, the next step in the qualified immunity analysis is whether the law was clearly established at the time of these events.

Kerley v. Servies

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

To overcome a qualified immunity defense, Plaintiff bears the burden of showing “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged … to qualified immunity.

Wayne v. Lake Station City of

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 24, 2020

“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 … “A state official is protected by qualified immunity unless the plaintiff shows: (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged

United States v. Schuchhardt

49 F. Supp. 567 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 7, 1943

Fraud is alleged and the government must establish such fraud by clear and satisfactory proof. … I am aware that on the witness stand Schuchhardt has denied or qualified most of the statements just mentioned. On the other hand he admits falsifying to the F. B.

Parents for Qual. Educ. v. Ft. Wayne Community Schools

662 F. Supp. 1475 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 22, 1987

PQEI alleges that the Fort Wayne Community Schools Corporation (FWCS) established and has maintained a racially dual school system. … ELEVENTH AMENDMENT The history of Eleventh Amendment jurisprudence clearly illustrates that a State and its agencies are treated differently, for the purposes of immunity, than state officials sued in their official capacity

Bochenek v. Walgreen Co.

18 F. Supp. 2d 965 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 11, 1998

Absent a factual dispute, whether the qualified privilege protects a statement is a question of law. Id. Once the privilege is established, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant abused the privilege. … She states-that Walgreens “cannot avoid a showing of malice or ill-will under [the qualified immunity] standard which negates the privilege.”

Benavidez v. City of Rochester, Indiana

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 19, 2023

on the basis of qualified immunity. … To overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must establish (1) a violation of a constitutional right and (2) that the federal right at issue was “clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” Id.

Walker v. Stone

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 10, 2025

Third, the defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because their actions were not clearly unconstitutional, as they used only a reasonable amount of force to obtain what was in Mr. … Thus, the defendants cannot avoid trial on grounds of qualified immunity. Their motion for summary judgment must be denied.

Sims v. Kernan

29 F. Supp. 2d 952 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 4, 1998

The doctrine of judicial immunity affords state judges absolute immunity for past judicial acts regarding matters within their court’s jurisdiction, even if their “exercise of authority is flawed by the commission of grave … Sims relief on these claims would require a finding or judgment that his conviction was invalid, and thus would clearly implicate the fact of his conviction. Mr.

Rosenbarger v. Shipman

857 F. Supp. 1282 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · May 6, 1994

IMMUNITY The court first notes that Judge Ship-man’s firing of Ms. Rosenbarger is not subject to absolute judicial immunity. … The defense of qualified judicial immunity was left open by the Supreme Court in Forrester, 484 U.S. at 228-30 , 108 S.Ct. at 545 , but any such defense has not yet been raised by the defendant.

McQuay

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 13, 2026

“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 … 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.