Case law

Gray-Hopkins v. Prince George's County, Maryland

163 F. Supp. 2d 571 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 24, 2001

Under the qualified immunity doctrine, law enforcement officials are not liable under federal law for civil damages to the extent that their conduct does not contravene “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … The officers are entitled to summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity if they can establish that “reasonable offieer[s] could have believed [that their actions were] lawful, in light of clearly established law

Henry v. Purnell

559 F. Supp. 2d 648 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 17, 2008

immunity.” … Thus, the fact that Maryland does not recognize qualified immunity for state constitutional violations, id., is of no moment in this case. 2 . Citing Pappas v.

Jones v. Murphy

470 F. Supp. 2d 537 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 4, 2007

Qualified Immunity The Wardens also claim qualified immunity with respect to all allegations against them. … presentment is a clearly established violation of constitutional rights.

Ross v. Cecil County Department of Social Services

878 F. Supp. 2d 606 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 12, 2012

Qualified immunity must be pled by the defendant official. Id. at 815. Once the official raises a qualified immunity defense, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that the official’s conduct violated the law. … on whether the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. 15 The Fourth Circuit has emphasized “the importance of resolving the question of qualified immunity at the summary judgment

Knussman v. Maryland

65 F. Supp. 2d 353 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 3, 1999

. § 1983 , *355 that qualified immunity is appropriate for all the individual defendants on the FMLA claim, that qualified immunity is not appropriate on the Equal Protection claim, and that plaintiff failed to establish … Qualified Immunity on Count I Finally, defendants renew their argument that Mullineaux should be entitled to qualified immunity on Count I. The Court finds no reason to disturb the jury’s findings in this regard.

Hodge v. College of Southern Maryland

121 F. Supp. 3d 486 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 3, 2015

The Supreme Court “has drawn on principles of sovereign immunity to construe the Amend *495 ment to establish that an unconsenting State is immune from suits brought in federal. courts by her own citizens as well as by citizens … individual Defendants violated clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.

Dyer v. Maryland State Board of Education

187 F. Supp. 3d 599 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 20, 2016

Plaintiffs federal claims as against them pursuant to the doctrine of qualified immunity. … removal of a local official for misconduct in office, via a statutory mechanism with extensive procedural protections, nevertheless violates some clearly established federal right.

Hodge v. Carroll County Department of Social Services

812 F. Supp. 593 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 21, 1992

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity acknowledges that subjecting public officials with discretionary functions to insubstantial lawsuits burdens not only the defendant officials, but society as a whole. Harlow v. … Accordingly, public officials enjoy qualified immunity from liability under § 1983 unless their actions violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Carrero v. Farrelly

280 F. Supp. 3d 774 · District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 1, 2017

Further, the Court found that Officer Farrelly was not entitled to qualified immunity because his conduct, as alleged in the Complaint, violated clearly established law at the time he stopped Plaintiff. … Counsel makes the same error in addressing Officer Farrelly’s qualified immunity defense.

Maryland Savings-Share Insurance Corp. v. United States

308 F. Supp. 761 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 22, 1970

MSSIC also cites intergovernmental tax immunity cases to establish that MSSIC’s activity is an essential governmental function. … The exemption carried forward, however, was qualified by adding a cutoff date of September 1, 1951. Insurers not organized before that date did not qualify for the exemption.

Benisek v. Lamone

263 F. Supp. 3d 551 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 31, 2017

Applying established principles of First Amendment retaliation cases, the Court distilled the three ele *553 ments that Plaintiffs will be called upon to prove in this case: 1. … seeking damages; those circumstances qualified the breadth of Tenney’s holding, in the Gillock Court’s view.

Jones v. Frederick County Board of Education

689 F. Supp. 535 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 20, 1988

A state’s general waiver of sovereign immunity does not qualify as a waiver of its constitutional immunity from suit in federal court under the Eleventh Amendment. … To establish a continuing violation, however, the plaintiff must establish that the unconstitutional or illegal act was a part of ‘standard operating procedure,’ a fixed and continuing practice.

Lynn v. O'LEARY

264 F. Supp. 2d 306 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 8, 2003

Defendants finally argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on any claim that the arrest and search were unconstitutional. … Next, assuming that a violation of the right is established, I must determine whether the right was clearly established at the time such that it would be clear to an objectively reasonable officer that his conduct violated

Brown v. Dep't of Pub. Safety & Corr. Servs.

383 F. Supp. 3d 519 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 13, 2019

Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. Defendants assert qualified immunity as a defense to Plaintiff's constitutional claims. … clearly established at the time of its alleged violation."

Pathways Psychosocial v. Town of Leonardtown, MD

223 F. Supp. 2d 699 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 9, 2002

Qualified immunity Defendants contend that Muchow should be qualifiedly immune because the court was wrong in stating, on summary judgment, that the “law was clearly estab *714 lished since 1985 that public officials cannot … Defendants are “entitled to summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity if they can establish that reasonable officials could have believed that their actions were lawful in light of both clearly established law

Adams v. Montgomery College

834 F. Supp. 2d 386 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 30, 2011

of sovereign immunity. … Defendants intentionally violate the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act by demonstrating deliberate indifference when they “[have] notice of the potential risk of their decision, and clearly [refuse] the accommodation knowingly

Maryland State Conference v. Maryland State Police

454 F. Supp. 2d 339 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 29, 2006

“If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity. … The troopers involved in the Rodwell stop are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Hicks v. Cassilly

971 F. Supp. 956 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 24, 1997

Rather, where a clearly established right is involved, a finding of qualified immunity depends on whether defendants’ actions were reasonable. … (finding that Ybarra doctrine is clearly established and, therefore, that qualified immunity does not shield police defendants who conducted a pat-down search of customers at a bar); Johns v.

Juncker v. Tinney

549 F. Supp. 574 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 3, 1982

Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense, a fact which makes it inappropriate, on two grounds, for a federal court to consider the issue of qualified immunity in ruling on a motion to dismiss a § 1983 suit for failure … The federal court should treat the qualified immunity defense no differently than any other defense that the defendants might raise in state court.

Martin v. Conner

882 F. Supp. 2d 820 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 2, 2012

Qualified Immunity a. Was the Right Clearly Established? The right not to be subjected to a traffic stop without reasonable suspicion was clearly established in 2009. … Qualified Immunity i. Was the Right Clearly Established?