Case law

Malkani v. Clark Consulting, Inc.

727 F. Supp. 2d 444 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 30, 2010

Both sovereign immunity and standing lie at the heart of federal subject matter jurisdiction. Falwell, 198 F.Supp.2d at 771. “Whether [a] plaintiff has standing to sue is a threshold jurisdictional question.” … As Plaintiffs note, it is inappropriate to consider an affir *452 mative defense such as the statute of limitations question on a motion to dismiss unless "all facts necessary to [rule on] the affirmative defense ‘clearly

Dancy v. Simms

116 F. Supp. 2d 652 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 15, 2000

Clearly, the professional judgments of Dancy’s health care providers and the emergency medication policies established by prison officials complied with the standard articulated in Charters . … Moreover, I need not consider the other defenses raised to § 1983 liability such as qualified immunity and the unavailability of respondeat superior.

Settles

District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 3, 2025

Qualified immunity shields a government official from civil damages in a § 1983 action if the official’s conduct does not violate clearly established law. Bland v. Roberts, 730 F.3d 368, 391 (4th Cir. 2013). … In determining whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, a court must consider (1) whether the official violated the plaintiff’s constitutional right and (2) whether the right was clearly established at the

Curtis v. Pracht

202 F. Supp. 2d 406 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 9, 2002

Plaintiffs bear the burden of demonstrating an unequivocal waiver of sovereign immunity, Williams v. … When a plaintiff has failed to establish a waiver of sovereign immunity, a federal court lacks jurisdiction to hear the case. Rich v. United States, 158 F.Supp.2d 619, 630 (D.Md.2001); Global Mail Ltd. v. U.S.

Bank of America, N.A. (USA) v. Stine

252 B.R. 902 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 12, 2000

Section 15-601.1 provides an exemption for nonbankruptcy debtors for the purpose of providing them with a means of sustenance immune from the demands of creditors. … parties’ respective contentions on the question of whether a bankruptcy debtor should be able to claim a separate exemption for his 75% share of garnished wages (identifiable as such) at the time of his bankruptcy filing, clearly

Cruse v. Sanni

District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 22, 2024

Qualified Immunity The Correctional Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … “Under our precedents, officers are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at

Corbitt v. Baltimore Police Department

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 22, 2022

“Qualified immunity shields government officials ‘who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably believe that their actions were lawful.’” Hunter v. … clearly established law.

Allotey v. Baltimore County, Maryland

District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 22, 2022

Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established … “An official is not entitled to qualified immunity if he or she deprived an individual of a constitutional right and that right was clearly established at the time of the violation.”

Powell v. United States

452 F. Supp. 2d 634 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 15, 2006

Williams, supra, clearly assumed the case’s retroactivity insofar as the due diligence requirement is concerned. … Maybeck, 23 F.3d 888 (4th Cir.1994) for the proposition that he is "clearly entitled to be re-sentenced as a non-career offender." The case does not aid Powell’s cause.

Rose v. Baltimore County Maryland

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 10, 2025

“One such situation is when the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.” … Evans’ constitutional rights, and that those rights were not clearly established, such that the Officers are entitled to qualified immunity.

Bae Systems Technology Solution & Services, Inc. v. Republic of Korea's Defense Acquisition Program Administration

195 F. Supp. 3d 776 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 19, 2016

Plaintiffs likelihood of success on the merits The plaintiff must “clearly demonstrate that he will likely succeed on the merits,” rather than present a mere “grave or serious question for litigation.” … As discussed previously, Plaintiff has shown that it is likely to establish this Court’s jurisdiction.

Hulbert v. Pope

District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 22, 2021

Alternatively, the Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because the right to record is not clearly established in the Fourth Circuit or in Maryland. … However, the court concluded that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity because the student’s right had not been clearly established at the time of his arrest. Id. at 186–87.

Coles v. Levine

561 F. Supp. 146 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 22, 1983

the members of the Adjustment Committee enjoy absolute immunity. … Because this case was decided before Carey , the question of whether the segregation was justified despite the due process violation was *152 not clearly addressed.

Pelt v. United States Department of Homeland Security

District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 14, 2024

Qualified immunity applies where the officers’ actions either did not violate the plaintiff’s constitutional rights or where such violations were not “clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct.” … But again, the proposed Amended Consolidated Complaint changes none of the pertinent facts that supported this Court’s prior decision to deny dismissal on qualified immunity.

United States v. State of Md.

488 F. Supp. 347 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 31, 1980

McCulloch involved a stamp tax imposed by Maryland on bank notes issued by "any Bank . . . established without authority from the State." … Certainly the burden, the harassment, the unpleasantness of those taxes would be as easy to establish as the burden of the present tax.

Fontell v. Hassett

870 F. Supp. 2d 395 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 28, 2012

FDCPA Claims In order for Defendants to be liable for FDCPA violations, they must qualify as “debt collectors” under the FDCPA. … These facts alone are insufficient to establish that Defendants should have known their claims were time-barred from the time they initiated suit.

Nolan

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 27, 2026

“Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages in a § 1983 action insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … To overcome an assertion of qualified immunity from a § 1983 claim, a plaintiff must show that (1) the government official violated a federally protected right of the plaintiff; and (2) that right was clearly established

Krell v. Braightmeyer

District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 3, 2019

Qualified immunity involves two prongs: (1) whether the facts shown establish a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct. Pearson v. … See id In ruling on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, the Court held the federal rights at issue in these three claims were clearly established and Defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity. (Mem. Op.

Smart v. Queens Anne County

District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 16, 2019

that the QACDC ban on photographs violates the First Amendment, the Court finds that Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on all claims. … See Booker, 855 F.3d at 539; Prison Legal News, 297 F.3d at 703 (finding the ban on bulk mail unconstitutional but granting qualified immunity to prison officials because they did not violate clearly established law).

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Browning-Ferris, Inc.

262 F. Supp. 2d 577 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 17, 2002

The evidence establishes that Ms. … Talusan’s opinion would not necessarily immunize it from liability. As discussed above, there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether Dr.