Case law

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.

VanDalsen v. Roswarksi

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 15, 2023

A related principle is the doctrine of qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law. . . .

Strickler v. McCord

306 F. Supp. 2d 818 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 17, 2004

He must first establish knowledge before getting to the appropriateness *827 of the Defendants’ response, or whether they are entitled to qualified immunity. … of the obviousness of the risk, it is unnecessary to get to the appropriateness of the defendants’ response, or whether they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Gray v. Abney

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 25, 2019

“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.” Id.

Gary Sheet & Tin Employees Federal Credit Union v. United States

605 F. Supp. 916 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 19, 1985

Initially, defendant agrees with the principle that the United States is immune from liability for reasons of sovereign immunity except where the immunity is waived and the United States consents to suit. … The purpose of the NCUA’s audit is to insure that the credit union is not a substantial risk to the insurer, the NCUA, and that it qualifies for insurance.

Huey v. Emmendorfer

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 12, 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 … To overcome a qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must show the deprivation of a constitutional right and “show that the right was clearly established at the time of the violation.” Id.

Jarrard v. Indiana Department of Corrections

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 19, 2022

warned him to stop, is not clearly established to be a Constitutional violation.” … Thus, the defendants cannot avoid trial on grounds of qualified immunity.

Tomsheck v. Town of Long Beach The

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 12, 2019

Tomsheck’s speech was not protected by the First Amendment (and at the very least, it was not clearly established that the speech was protected, as required to avoid qualified immunity), and (2) that he was not fired for … Tomsheck’s claims against the individuals, each of whom asserted a defense of qualified immunity.2 Though qualified immunity is an affirmative defense, once it is raised the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that

McKinnon v. Neal

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 17, 2024

The defendants also argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because their actions did not violate any clearly established law, as they used only a small amount of OC spray to subdue and maintain control over McKinnon … Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 202 (2001) (“The relevant, dispositive inquiry in determining whether a right is clearly established is whether it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation

Economan v. Cockrell

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 30, 2024

Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … “To counter the defense of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show that the constitutional right at issue was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” Greene v. Teslik, 2023 U.S. App.

Schenke v. Lehman

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 9, 2020

Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity regarding their seizure of Schenke’s firearms. … “Qualified immunity shields a government official from suit when the official is performing a discretionary function and his conduct does not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known

Smith v. Iron Workers Dist. Council of S. Ohio & Vicinity Pension Trust

329 F. Supp. 3d 647 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 28, 2018

In this case, the Fund, as the party moving for transfer, "has the burden of establishing, by reference to particular circumstances, that the transferee forum is clearly more convenient." Coffey , 796 F.2d at 220 . … As such, the claim clearly 'relates to' an ERISA plan and is preempted by § 514(a) of ERISA."); Dorn v. Int'l Broth. of Elec.

Comandella v. Town of Munster

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 9, 2020

However, Defendants Ayersman and Wells are entitled to qualified immunity on the false arrest claim. … [the arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law.”

Rodgers v. Gary Community School Corp.

167 F. Supp. 3d 940 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 1, 2016

Cook Cnty., 563 F.3d 598, 603 (7th Cir.2009). 1 To establish a prima facie case for failure to accommodate, Rodgers must show that: (1) she is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) GCSC was aware of her disability … Rodgers must also establish that she is a “qualified individual” under the ADA, which is defined as an individual with a disability “who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the

White v. Indiana Dept. of Correction

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 20, 2021

“Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are liable for civil damages . . . only when their conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … In evaluating a qualified immunity defense at the summary judgment stage, the court considers (1) whether the facts, taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, show that the defendant violated a clearly established

Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Bush

736 F. Supp. 945 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 7, 1989

Clearly, a person who can establish nonliability can petition for reimbursement of reasonable expenses incurred while complying with an order received after October 17,1986. 42 U.S.C. § 9606 (b)(2). … Furthermore, the source of the funds for reimbursement is the Superfund, a trust fund established in the United States Treasury and all suits to take money from the public treasury implicate sovereign immunity.

Collins v. Purdue University

703 F. Supp. 2d 862 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 24, 2010

Federated’s story almost a month after the fact clearly reported that Collins’ assault and the date of Steffey’s last sighting happened to be the same date. … Although much of the initial CDA immunity was granted to internet service providers like AOL, Collins incorrectly asserts that the immunity ends with such providers.

Rowe v. Davis

373 F. Supp. 2d 822 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jun 15, 2005

The court must review the merits of a prisoner complaint and dismiss it if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … Nevertheless he argues that the confiscated literature in question does not qualify and therefore cannot be prohibited for either of those reasons. Mr.

Kleven v. St. Joseph County

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 22, 2022

Joseph County, and that it either does not qualify for statutory immunity or an exception to the immunity statute applies. … The Klevens argue Motorola is not eligible for this immunity or, alternatively, qualifies for an exception to it.

Vottero v. Sirocky

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 8, 2023

Government officials, like the individual defendants named in this case, are entitled to immunity “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … constitutional standards at issue were clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”