Case law

Coley v. Secretary of the Army

689 F. Supp. 519 · District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 1, 1987

and for which he was qualified. … Unlike Dancy and Carter , this case involves a clearly articulated and established policy of reassigning handicapped persons.

Wallace v. Patterson

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 30, 2020

Qualified Immunity The defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on all claims against them. … Pursuant to the doctrine of qualified immunity, even if a public official engages in unconstitutional conduct, he “may nevertheless be shielded from liability for civil damages if [his] actions did not violate clearly established

Armwood v. Pepersack

244 F. Supp. 469 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 22, 1965

privileges and immunities and the State failed to establish that such consent or waiver was free and voluntary and not the result of duress or coercion, actual or implied. 3. … Judge Bryan in his dissent stated that the evidence clearly established a consent to the search.

Bannerman

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 7, 2026

immunity. … At this juncture, such factual disputes preclude the application of qualified immunity. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 251-252 (1986).

Kleger

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 8, 2026

Defendant Robinson is Not Entitled to Qualified Immunity or Public Official Immunity. … Defendant Robinson correctly states that qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability “unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.” Pearson v.

Hayat v. Diaz

District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 12, 2025

Qualified Immunity Lastly, the Supreme Court has explained that the “doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar … And so, it is well-established that “[t]he doctrine of qualified immunity protects police officers and public officials from claims of constitutional violations ‘for reasonable mistakes as to the legality of their actions

Green v. Campbell

District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 23, 2023

Qualified Immunity This Court disagrees with Defendants’ contention, at this stage of the litigation, that the constitutional right at issue was not clearly established … Accordingly, the doctrine of qualified immunity does not shield Defendants from Plaintiff’s claims at this stage, although Defendants are permitted to re-raise the issue at subsequent phases in the litigation.

Joyner v. McClellan.

396 F. Supp. 912 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 18, 1975

Despite the commands of Rule 8(a)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff has nowhere clearly set forth the nature of the relief sought. Giving the complaint a liberal reading, Haines v. … At most, it alleges that standards are inconsistently applied and that some persons, who in Joyner’s opinion were less “qualified” to move from a maximum security institution to a lower security institution, have been so

Jefferson v. United States

77 F. Supp. 706 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 7, 1948

Grose’s opinion he is not employable industrially but could do clerical work if otherwise qualified therefor. … the Veterans’ Administration established during or shortly after the First World War.

Strothers v. City of Laurel

118 F. Supp. 3d 852 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 27, 2015

In the Fourth Circuit, the burden-shifting framework established in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. … grounds. 5 “[Djeeply ingrained in Maryland law is the doctrine of sovereign immunity.”

Pinkett v. United States

105 F. Supp. 67 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 3, 1952

It is admitted that Black and Ayers, who were clearly interested parties, did not receive notice of the Cochran application and of the hearing before the examiner. … These decisions conclusively establish the rule that the Interstate Commerce Commission in passing on an application of a motor carrier for a certificate of convenience and necessity is obliged to observe the requirements

Podberesky v. Kirwan

764 F. Supp. 364 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 15, 1991

The causation element is also clearly satisfied in this case. … However, assuming that § 1981 covers scholarship benefits (and assuming that § 1981 extends to states) 3 , Podberesky has failed to establish that defendants have waived their Eleventh Amendment immunity.

Verderamo v. Mayor & City Council

4 F. Supp. 3d 722 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 5, 2014

thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws” of the United States. … Therefore, the BPD claims it "enjoys sovereign immunity against all tort liability,” Police Memo at 12, and as to all "State law claims in this case.” Id. at 14.

Krikstan

District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 15, 2026

Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201 (2001) (where no constitutional violation is shown, there is no requirement for further inquiry regarding qualified immunity). … Turning first to Krikstan’s negligent supervision claim (Count Three), the Court finds that this claim is barred because the MTCA confers state personnel “with qualified immunity from negligence actions” such as this.

Lewis v. Community College of Baltimore County

District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 3, 2023

CCBC qualifies for the protection of immunity. See Jenkins v. Kurtinitis, Civ. No. ELH-14-01346, 2015 WL 1285355, at *8 (D. Md. Mar. 20, 2015) (“CCBC is an arm of the State.”); Adams v. Montgomery Coll., Civ. No. … Jan. 8, 2004) 3 Some of Plaintiff’s claims have even shorter statutes of limitations, which clearly have not been met. For example, defamation has only a one-year statute of limitations. MD. CODE ANN., CTS. & JUD.

Mills v. Roderick

District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 5, 2024

entitled to qualified immunity; (4) Mills failed to a administrative remedies; (5) Mills has failed to state a claim; and (6) all Defendants are ve to summary judgment? … The Court also does not address Defendants’ argument that they are mye to qualified immunity. .

Uhrig v. United States

592 F. Supp. 349 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 30, 1984

[Pet., H 29] Taxpayer’s contention (HH 1 and 4) that the IRS lacks jurisdiction to issue a summons and that Taxpayer is immune (e.g., not a person liable to pay taxes) is without merit. … Under TEFRA’s new “bright line” test, a summons issued for a criminal purpose is enforceable unless there is a “Justice Department referral”. 6 In the instant case, Special Agent Morris’ Declaration clearly establishes that

Okoye

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 5, 2026

A facial challenge asserts “that the allegations pleaded in the complaint are insufficient to establish subject matter jurisdiction.” Id. … Feb. 13, 2024) (finding that “DHS qualifies for sovereign immunity.”). Plaintiff asserts that State Defendants are all employees of DHS and each served, at various times, as Plaintiff’s supervisor or manager.

Rice v. Distance

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 3, 2021

Additionally, this Court notes that even if Rice could establish both prongs of the excessive force test, Distance would still be entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … actions were lawful in light of clearly established law.’”

University of Maryland v. Cleland

516 F. Supp. 448 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 2, 1981

The University is clearly entitled to payment for overseas courses provided to servicement. Similarly, the VA is obligated to issue benefit checks for course work undertaken by eligible servicemen. … The Supreme Court has established by the above-quoted language a two-pronged test to be applied in determining whether an action is moot.