Case law

Canter v. Warden Ronald Weber

District Court, D. Maryland · May 12, 2022

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity balances two important interests—the need to hold public officials accountable when they exercise power irresponsibly and the … If the right was not clearly established, the qualified immunity doctrine shields a defendant officer from liability.

Kelly v. Miller

District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 19, 2021

Qualified immunity turns on the “objective reasonableness of an official’s conduct, as measured by reference to clearly established law.” Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818. … However, “[a] right need not be recognized by a court in a specific factual context before such right may be considered ‘clearly established’ for purposes of qualified immunity.”

Mi Ah Kim v. United States

609 F. Supp. 2d 499 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 2, 2009

Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ FTCA claims must fail because sovereign immunity bars these claims. … To establish a violation of due process, “a claimant must first establish that he had a property or liberty interest at stake.” Dekoladenu v. Gonzales, 459 F.3d 500, 508 (4th Cir.2006) (internal quotations omitted).

Hicks v. Ferreyra

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 28, 2022

“A right need not be recognized by a court in a specific factual context before such right may be considered ‘clearly established’ for purposes of qualified immunity.” Wilson v. … Special Verdict 5-6, ECF No. 150.6 Officer Phillips has not carried his burden of establishing entitlement to qualified immunity under the circumstances of the second encounter.

Talley v. Anne Arundel County, Maryland

District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 17, 2021

The Individual Defendants claim qualified immunity, arguing that Plaintiff fails to state a claim for a violation of his clearly established constitutional rights. … “Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability and suit ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

Metropolitan Regional Information Systems, Inc. v. American Home Realty Network, Inc.

18 F. Supp. 3d 662 · District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 30, 2013

According to AHRN, “NAR is making the real estate market less efficient by depriving the consumer of the ability to select the most qualified agents for their Deal, thereby driving up brokerage services costs and reducing … AHRN further asserts that MRIS’s work for hire representations concealed the fact that MRIS lacks records establishing its ownership of the photographic images in the database.

Conway v. Takoma Park Volunteer Fire Department, Inc.

666 F. Supp. 786 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 30, 1987

It cannot claim an immunity based on a condition which it itself sought to avoid.” 669 F.2d at 678 .) … The court will establish a date for a conference, at which time the parties will inform the court of the status of the case, and, if necessary, will establish an appropriate scheduling order, and trial date.

Lancaster v. Baltimore County Maryland

District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 13, 2021

Qualified immunity “protect[s] government officials performing discretionary functions from civil damage suits ‘insofar as [the officials’] conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … As set forth above, qualified immunity “protect[s] government officials performing discretionary functions from civil damage suits ‘insofar as [the officials’] conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

Patterson

District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 3, 2026

To establish a violation of Title IJ, Patterson must show that “(1) [he] ha[s] a disability; ‘(2) [he is] otherwise qualified to receive the benefits of a public service, program, or activity; and (3) [he was] denied the … Pachtman, 424 US. 409, 427-28 (1976) (providing that qualifying a: prosecutor’s immunity would “prevent the vigorous and fearless performance of the prosecutor’s duty that is essential to the proper functioning of

Williams v. United States

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 24, 2025

Myers seeking dismissal of the complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and on qualified immunity grounds (ECF No. 32). … immunity.

Burno-Whalen v. The State of Maryland

District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 23, 2019

Accordingly, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is not appropriate. … In addition, Defendant Okafor asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity.

Knussman v. State of Md.

935 F. Supp. 659 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 2, 1996

“Absent a waiver of that immunity by the state, or an abrogation of that immunity by Congress, a federal court may not entertain a citizen’s suit against a state.” Reich v. … Examining the language of the FMLA, clearly the statute was enacted to benefit families.

Ammer v. United States

881 F. Supp. 1007 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 20, 1994

Moreover, the Supreme Court has construed the SAA statute of limitations as a jurisdictional prerequisite to the waiver of sovereign immunity. McMahon v. … Hansen, 450 U.S. 785, 790 , 101 S.Ct. 1468, 1471-72 , 67 L.Ed.2d 685 (1981) (holding administrative agent’s clearly erroneous legal representations fell “far short” of conduct which would justify estop-ping the government

Harts v. Calvert County Sheriff

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 5, 2024

“Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably believe that their actions were lawful.” Henry v. … Under the first prong, courts determine “whether a constitutional right would have been violated on the facts alleged,” and under the second prong, whether that constitutional right was clearly established.

Hartford Ins. Co. of Midwest v. American Automatic Sprinkler Systems, Inc.

23 F. Supp. 2d 623 · District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 15, 1998

Consequently, the parties’ only disagreement 'is whether the statute bestows immunity on American. … Since American pled the defense of limitations in its answer, this defense clearly has not been waived.

Child Evangelism Fellowship of Maryland, Inc. v. Montgomery County Public Schools

368 F. Supp. 2d 416 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 24, 2005

Although CEF disputes that MCPS is a state agency entitled to the defense of sovereign immunity, the Court is satisfied that extensive case law establishes just the contrary: MCPS is a state agency which enjoys sovereign … immunity.

Rosin v. Board of Education of Charles County

District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 5, 2021

Clearly Established Right Whether a right was “clearly established” turns on whether “the contours of the right [were] sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what [the official] is doing … Defendants’ Motion will therefore be granted as to Counts 1 and 2 on the basis of qualified immunity.

Maryland Port Administration v. SS American Legend

453 F. Supp. 584 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 3, 1978

This testimony establishes a factual dispute as to whether U.S. Lines was negligent in not suspending operations and whether it had a duty to suspend operations. … Lines in this case is clearly sufficient (under a Rule 56 motion) to support a finding that the accident was caused by a vessel within the meaning of the Admiralty Extension Act.

Serio v. Baltimore County

115 F. Supp. 2d 509 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 20, 2000

This remaining interest — whether it be called ownership, title, or simply a non-possessory right — qualifies as a property interest protected by constitutional due process 7 , thereby allowing Serio to establish the first … The language of 445B clearly states that disposition of firearms seized pursuant to the statute may be disposed of only after a finding of guilt.

Guiney v. United States

295 F. Supp. 789 · District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 4, 1969

The widow did not renounce the bequest and the trust provided for in Item Second was established. … The controlling principles are clearly stated in Pierpont: “Finally, we consider the estate’s argument that by our holding today we frustrate Pierpont’s clearly established dispositive intent.