Case law

Mongeau v. City of Marlborough

462 F. Supp. 2d 144 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 13, 2006

Consequently, as counterintuitive as it may seem, Reid is entitled to qualified immunity even if he required mitigation payments in order to grant a permit. … This qualified immunity follows in the wake of the First Circuit’s express reluctance to recognize any type of section 1983 claim in this particular context. b.

Doe v. Town of Framingham

965 F. Supp. 226 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 4, 1997

Qualified immunity shields public officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … Team members and school officials may well be eligible for qualified immunity, see Puffer v.

Boston Taxi Owners Ass'n v. City of Boston

180 F. Supp. 3d 108 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 31, 2016

To assess qualified immunity claims, the Court applies a two-step inquiry. … Consequently, the Court cannot determine, at this stage of the litigation, whether Commissioner Evans is entitled to qualified immunity.

Roslindale Cooperative Bank v. Greenwald

481 F. Supp. 749 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 7, 1979

Insofar as the removed directors seek damages from Greenwald, their claim is circumscribed by the doctrine of qualified immunity of executive department officials. Scheuer v. … Under the statute, the Commissioner bears responsibility for the conduct of the hearing; therefore, within the limits permitted by qualified executive immunity, she alone is accountable for constitutional defects in the proceedings

Amica Mutual Insurance v. W.C. Bradley Co.

217 F.R.D. 79 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 4, 2003

Arnica has withheld this information claiming work product immunity, attorney-client privilege, or that the information is proprietary and confidential. … Babcock & Wilcox Canada, 210 F.3d 1, 8 (1st Cir. 2000) (courts do not clearly distinguish between confidential information, proprietary information, and trade secrets).

Cox v. Massachusetts Department of Correction

18 F. Supp. 3d 38 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 12, 2014

The question remains, however, whether the claim is nevertheless barred by the doctrine of qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects public employees “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Villanueva v. Franklin County Sheriff's Office

849 F. Supp. 2d 186 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 27, 2012

Defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Fontanes, 568 F.3d 263, 269 (1st Cir.2009) (laying out the test for a claim of qualified immunity).

Lamoureux v. Haight

648 F. Supp. 1169 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 28, 1986

In addition, the individual defendants who have been sued in their personal as well as in their official capacities have moved for dismissal based on the defense of qualified immunity. … It is, therefore, not necessary to decide the issue of qualified immunity. I. FACTS The facts alleged in the complaint are as follows.

Estate of Davis Ex Rel. Davis v. United States

340 F. Supp. 2d 79 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 15, 2004

In a similar vein, the individual defendants in that case— former FBI agents— argued they were entitled to qualified immunity as to the plaintiffs’ constitutional claims, because it was not “clearly established” at the relevant … In response to the argument of the individual defendants that they were entitled to qualified immunity, Judge Gertner observed: While it may be true that the defendants could be entitled to qualified immunity for a narrow

Rubin v. the Islamic Republic of Iran

456 F. Supp. 2d 228 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 2006

Sections 1604 and 1605 establish a foreign state’s jurisdictional immunity and exceptions to that immunity. … The trustee process defendants do not quibble with either of these conclusions; rather, they contend that the antiquities in their possession do not qualify as “blocked assets.”

Taite v. Bridgewater State University

236 F. Supp. 3d 466 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 17, 2017

Mass. 2016) (“[i]t is undisputed that Mass Bay qualifies as a state entity and therefore can assert Eleventh Amendment protection”); Thomas v. … Rhode Island College, 996 F.Supp. 161, 168 (D.R.I. 1998) (“It is clearly established law in the federal courts that the 14th amendment does , not create a cause of action against state actors.

Brockton Power LLC v. City of Brockton

948 F. Supp. 2d 48 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 30, 2013

Qualified Immunity All moving defendants invoke the doctrine of qualified immunity. Doc. No. 55 at 5-6; Doc. No. 59 at 10-11; Doc. No. 61 at 10-11; Doc. No. 63 at 22-23; Doc. No. 65 at 3. … right,” and (2) “the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the alleged violation.”

Limone v. United States

336 F. Supp. 2d 18 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 17, 2004

Qualified and Absolute Immunity on all Bivens Claims.53 VII. … did not violate any Constitutional rights that were clearly established at the time of the alleged offenses.

Ken's Foods, Inc. v. Ken's Steak House, Inc.

213 F.R.D. 89 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 11, 2002

“To qualify for the privilege, the communication must have been made in confidence.” Id. … , or the inadvertent failure to designate information as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL,” will not be deemed to constitute a waiver of such privilege, immunity, rights, or any other privilege, immunity, or rights

Ciulla v. Rigny

89 F. Supp. 2d 97 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 8, 2000

’s motion on the basis of qualified immunity. … A determination of qualified immunity does not prevent a party who otherwise prevailed from obtaining a fee award. See Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522, 543-44 , 104 S.Ct. 1970 , 80 L.Ed.2d 565 (1984); Handy v.

Rua v. Glodis

52 F. Supp. 3d 84 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 24, 2014

Qualifíed Immunity Before proceeding to the merits of plaintiffs claims, the Court first considers whether the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the constitutional claims. … The First Circuit has described the test for qualified immunity: We use a three-part test to determine whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, following the guidance provided by the Supreme Court.

Drumgold v. Callahan

806 F. Supp. 2d 405 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 24, 2011

Qualified Immunity To prevail against a state officer who claims qualified immunity, however, a plaintiff must show not only that his constitutional right was violated, but also that that right was clearly established at … The First Circuit has articulated that this “clearly established” inquiry is two fold: (1) whether the law was generally clearly established; and (2) whether the law was clearly established as applied to the factual context

Estate of Usaamah Abdullah Rahim v. United States of America

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 2, 2020

Clearly Established Rights This does not end the court’s analysis, however, as the doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials whose “conduct does not violate clearly … What the law does or does not clearly establish for purposes of assessing qualified immunity is a question of law. See Morse v. Cloutier, 869 F.3d 16, 22 (1st Cir. 2017).

White v. Town of Marblehead

989 F. Supp. 345 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 17, 1997

immunity. … In view of my holding that probable Cause to arrest existed on both March 20, 1995; and March 22, 1995, with respect to the parties sued, I find it unnecessary to consider whether qualified immunity attaches to the remaining

Najas Realty, LLC v. Seekonk Water District

68 F. Supp. 3d 246 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 23, 2014

Since this court has determined that the plaintiffs have not established a violation of their constitutional rights, there is no need to address Bernardo's contention that he is entitled to qualified immunity from suit under … second being "whether the violated right was clearly established at the time that the offending conduct occurred.”).