Case law

O'LEARY v. Provident Life and Accident Ins. Co.

456 F. Supp. 2d 285 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 20, 2006

The present case, however, is clearly distinguishable. … Thus, even if O’Leary established the policy, it still qualifies as an ERISA plan because the Fund maintained it. 8.

Jakuttis v. Town of Dracut

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 14, 2023

The Doctrine of Qualified Immunity .................. 11 b. Summary Judgment and Qualified Immunity ............. 13 c. Motion to Dismiss and Qualified Immunity ............ 14 d. … whether the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the defendant's alleged violation.”

Hankey v. Town of Concord-Carlisle

136 F. Supp. 3d 52 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 2015

Moreover, the Individual Defendants in their individual capacities are entitled to qualified immunity on the ground that it was not clearly established that Defendants created a danger in this case sufficient to give rise … See, e.g., Melendez-Garcia, 629 F.3d at 37 (affirming qualified immunity on failure-to-protect theory of substantive due process). .

Taylor v. Town of Falmouth

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 6, 2019

“Qualified immunity affords limited protection to public officials faced with liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … “Clearly Established” Having sufficiently shown a constitutional violation, Taylor must next show that the right was “clearly established” at the

Bateman v. Federal Deposit Insurance

112 F. Supp. 2d 89 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 22, 2000

Sovereign Immunity i) The Federal Tort Claims Act The FDIC is an instrumentality and agency of the United States and cannot be sued absent a waiver of sovereign immunity. … The evidence establishes that the purpose of Bateman’s negotiations with the FDIC was to settle his obligations under the Note.

Hootstein

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 8, 2025

Qualified immunity protects 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 … The two-part test applicable to the defense of qualified immunity are (1) whether the facts alleged or shown by the plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) whether the right was clearly established

Grannum v. Evangelidis

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 27, 2019

A defendant in a § 1983 action is entitled to qualified immunity from damages for civil liability if the defendant’s conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … To determine if a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, this Court asks whether: (1) the plaintiff’s allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation; (2) the right that was allegedly violated was clearly

Abdul-Hasib v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation

District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 28, 2019

It is true that to defeat a claim of qualified immunity, the precedent invoked “must be clear enough that every reasonable official would interpret it to establish the particular rule the plaintiff seeks to apply.” … Ct. 500, 503 (2019) (per curiam) (finding no clearly established rule prohibiting the “takedown” of a person engaged in the misdemeanor offense of resisting a police officer).

Ryan v. McCullough

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 24, 2025

right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.” … Nor is McCullough entitled to qualified immunity as to this claim as “[i]t is clearly established law that the Fourth Amendment requires that arrests be based upon probable cause.” Martínez- Rodríguez v.

Jenkins v. City of Taunton

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 8, 2018

After surveying the clearly established law in the context of these and other facts in the record construed in plaintiff’s favor, this court found that such law “would have given a reasonable … Finally, although mindful that qualified immunity is an immunity from suit as well as monetary damages, the denial of qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage does not foreclose

Washington v. St. Amand

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 9, 2018

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects all public officials except the “plainly incompetent [and] those who knowingly violate the law.” … Second, we inquire whether the violated right was clearly established at the time that the offending conduct occurred.

Blizard v. Fielding

454 F. Supp. 318 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 11, 1978

Moreover, one witness, Edward Kuypers, a former state employee who had previously worked with plaintiff, testified that he considered her excellently qualified for the position she sought. … Blizard’s actions at work went beyond the scope of protected opposition and thus were not immunized by the statute.

Biogen, Inc. v. SCHERING AG

954 F. Supp. 391 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 4, 1996

Contrary to defendants’ contention, this conclusion is not qualified because Biogen was on May 3, 1996 immune from suit by virtue of the “safe harbor” provision of 35 U.S.C. § 271 (e)(1) and, therefore, knew it could not … Accordingly, Biogen had by May 3, 1996 clearly manifested by its actions its intent to market Avonex as soon as possible.

King v. Higgins

370 F. Supp. 1023 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 30, 1974

The decision to order plaintiff from the minimal security of the prison farm 4 to segregation, with the attendant possibility of reclassification and future re-punishment, 5 is clearly one that markedly changed his status … “use” immunity for statements the inmate might make at the disciplinary hearing and a requirement that the inmate be informed at the hearing of *1028 this immunity and its consequences; 2. permission for the inmate to bring

Brown

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 6, 2026

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that Brown’s § 1983 claims against Defendants in their individual capacities should be dismissed on qualified immunity grounds. … clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’”

Griffin v. West Side Corp. (In Re Erlin Manor Nursing Home, Inc.)

86 B.R. 307 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 25, 1985

At the beginning of each fiscal year, the Commission establishes an interim rate, according to which providers of care are reimbursed monthly. … The injunction entered by the bankruptcy court in this case clearly exceeds these limitations because it is directed against the “Commonwealth of Massachusetts.” This defect, however, is easily cured.

Rodriguez v. City of Springfield

127 F.R.D. 426 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 21, 1989

Based upon past experience, the court assumes that at least one of the bases for the motion for summary judgment will be the qualified immunity of the defendants. … However, in determining whether the defendant would enjoy qualified immunity, the court stated, “[w]e read the [Supreme Court’s] strong condemnation of insubstantial suits against Government officers as calling for application

Cline v. Burke

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 12, 2023

Qualified Immunity “The general rule of qualified immunity . . . is that ‘government officials performing discretionary functions, generally 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 would have known.’”

Riley v. City Of Boston

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 18, 2025

Qualified immunity protects public officials, in their individual capacity, “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Determining whether a right is “clearly established” is a two-part inquiry.

Rosa v. Lawrence Housing Authority

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 20, 2021

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … (2) that the right infringed upon was not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.