Case law

Trigones v. Hall

115 F. Supp. 2d 158 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 27, 2000

To qualify for review, Petitioner must demonstrate that his Due Process claim is either “contrary to,” or involves an “unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the … Petitioner’s claim can only proceed, therefore, if the gatekeeper statute he challenges constitutes an “unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court jurisprudence.” O’Brien, 145 F.3d at 25 .

Burns v. City of Worcester

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 20, 2025

Qualified immunity “shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” Mullenix v. … The Court does a two-step analysis to determine if qualified immunity bars a claim.

Canty v. Old Rochester Regional School District

54 F. Supp. 2d 66 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 21, 1999

immunity from punitive damages under Title IX. … with municipal immunity to punitive damages.

Wood v. Haverhill Police Department

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 13, 2024

The doctrine of 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 … The second prong “asks whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.” Id. at 656 (quoting Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 739 (2002)).

O'Connell v. Town of Tewksbury

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 28, 2018

The doctrine of qualified immunity “shields government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … right was “clearly established” at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.

Daniels v. Agin

482 B.R. 1 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 2012

disclose and had concealed the IRAs was not clearly erroneous. … Although funds held in properly established and disclosed IRAs are entitled to exempt status, Rousey v.

Curran v. Cousins

482 F. Supp. 2d 36 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 30, 2007

The defendants assert alternatively that Cousins and Goff are protected from the plaintiffs First Amendment claim by qualified immunity, and that the Department, as a state government entity, may not be sued on a respondeat … Given these rulings, there is no need for me to reach the qualified immunity question. Having disposed of the plaintiffs federal claim, I decline to exercise jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.

Clergeau v. Department of Correction

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 27, 2024

Qualified immunity shields government officials “from liability for civil damages” when “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … However, Defendants would not be entitled to qualified immunity if the facts establish that Clergeau continued to be beaten well after the officers knew the use of force was no longer necessary. Hope v.

Nault v. Bazarewsky

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 26, 2018

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

Unicare Life & Health Insurance v. Phanor

472 F. Supp. 2d 8 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 30, 2007

To qualify as a QDRO, a domestic relations order also much clearly specify “each plan to which such order applies.” 32 The terms of the ARO forbid “changing the beneficiary of any life insurance policy.” 33 This broad proscription … This court therefore concludes that the Automatic Restraining Order issued by the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court is a Qualified Domestic Relations Order under ERISA.

United States v. Rockland Trust Co.

860 F. Supp. 895 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 17, 1994

Nat’l Bank of Commerce may be distinguished in that the taxpayer in that case had an “unrestricted right to withdraw funds from the account”, a power the Court found plainly “qualified as a right to property for purposes … That the statement may have been made maheiously or in bad faith, moreover, would not cause Belford’s immunity to be withdrawn.

Winfield v. Town of Andover

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 4, 2018

As the constitutional rights in this area are thus not firmly established, the persons sued are entitled to qualified immunity. … “Unless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of

Mota v. O'Brien

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 28, 2018

To overcome the defense of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show that the “plaintiff’s allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation;” that the “right was clearly established at the time of the alleged … Mota has pointed to no precedent that would “clearly establish” that the prior standard operating procedure violated his constitutional rights.

Laraia v. United States

232 F. Supp. 602 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 12, 1964

The Smith case quoted above, which the government cited in support of its position and which denied the taxpayer head of household status, is clearly distinguishable on the facts, in that the taxpayer there maintained two … Such was not the sitúa-' tion in this case where the plaintiff never established another permanent residence but rather spent one night in a hotel and the next at his brother’s house, always in anticipation of being able

Sheffield v. City of Boston

319 F.R.D. 52 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 28, 2016

immunity defenses. … Plaintiff responds that the report is relevant to establishing its Monell claims by showing a custom of racial discrimination.

United States v. Butt

745 F. Supp. 34 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 30, 1990

Clearly, Semon knew that the prosecutor was referring to illegal receipt of money because he responded, “No Ma’am, and that was my job to investigate that.” … Relatedness can be established by “demonstrating that essentially the same facts must be shown for each of the consolidated crimes.” Id. at 908.

Gallego v. Wilson

882 F. Supp. 1169 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 19, 1995

First, a single alleged incident of individual misconduct cannot establish a municipal policy or custom. See, e.g., Oklahoma City v. … The City of Boston contends it enjoys immunity under the following provision of the amended statute: (h) any claim upon the failure to establish a police department or a particular police protection service, or if police

Crooker v. Van Higgins

682 F. Supp. 1274 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 4, 1988

The other defendants presented legal defenses of consent and qualified immunity, yet for some unknown reason failed to accompany those defenses with legal arguments. … They assert further that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Castagna v. Jean

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 17, 2019

The Officers’ Entry Was Not Protected by Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are protected from liability for the entry under the doctrine of qualified immunity. Defs.’ Mem. at 14-16 [#298]. … For qualified immunity to apply, the court must explore “whether the facts that a plaintiff has alleged or shown make out a violation of a constitutional right” and “whether the right at issue was ‘clearly established’

Natriello v. Flynn

837 F. Supp. 17 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 18, 1993

To prevail in an action brought under § 1983 a plaintiff must show that he or she *19 was deprived of a right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. … Moreover, an examination of the relief sought in plaintiffs Count II in this case clearly indicates that it is based upon the loss suffered by the decedent’s relatives due to Mr. Na-triello’s death.