Case law

MOORE v. COLON

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 29, 2023

An award of qualified immunity protects a government official from civil liability and suit “insofar as [his] conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … is no clearly established law that would put them on notice that their conduct was unlawful, but they cite no Eighth Amendment excessive force decisions analyzing the clearly established prong of qualified immunity.

Plain v. Flicker

645 F. Supp. 898 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 21, 1986

Clearly, physicians, certifying a commitment have assumed a public function. … Officers of the state, exercising discretionary powers in performing their duties are entitled to qualified immunity insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights which a

Shalik Coleman v. Corizon Medical, et al.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 30, 2026

Hicks Is Entitled to Qualified Immunity Hicks is entitled to qualified immunity with respect to Plaintiff’s “rough ride” claim. … An official is entitled to qualified immunity if the constitutional right allegedly violated was not “‘clearly established’ at the time of the defendant’s actions.” Estate of Lagano v. Bergen Cnty.

United States v. Skalsky

621 F. Supp. 528 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 7, 1985

In light of the established fact that the defendant and Mr. … Particularly in light of the fact that the Government clearly did ask specifically whether Messrs.

PANOVA v. PALISADES INTERSTATE PARKWAY POLICE DEPARTMENT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 28, 2022

Qualified Immunity and Good Faith Immunity Under N.J.S.A. 59:3-3. … Qualified immunity “shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”

BRADY v. TOWNSHIP OF WOODBRIDGE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 29, 2021

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability so long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Apr. 13, 2021) (noting that “the right to be free from malicious prosecution is clearly established” and declining to rule on qualified immunity on summary judgment because a genuine dispute of material fact existed as

<font color="red">DO NOT FILE IN THIS CASE</font> TRANSFERRED TO TRENTON - NEW CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:18-cv-13943

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 3, 2022

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … “The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.”

WILLIAMS v. BOSLEY

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 30, 2023

In other words, “[w]hen analyzing a qualified immunity claim, [courts] consider [two prongs:] (1) whether the plaintiff sufficiently alleged the violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether the right was ‘clearly … This is because, depending on which factual narrative is adopted by the factfinder, the Court’s analysis of qualified immunity and what clearly established law may apply will change substantially.

KADONSKY v. D'ILIO

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 30, 2022

immunity as they did not violate a clearly established constitutional right. … Plaintiff has thus failed to show the denial of a clearly established right as to these claims, and Defendants are thus also entitled to judgment as a matter of law as they are entitled to qualified immunity as to these

Murakush Caliphate of Amexem Inc. v. New Jersey

790 F. Supp. 2d 241 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 13, 2011

thus it cannot ever qualify for appointment of pro bono counsel, see United States v. … Such claims of "diplomatic immunity” are without merit.

Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Crowell

245 F. 668 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 17, 1917

It seems to be perfectly clear, and to require no discus *672 sion to establish, that the statute does impose liability upon the defendants. [2] Has a defense sufficient to shield the defendants from liability been pleaded … The extent of immunity is fixed by the law providing for the creation of the artificial body or person, and such a provision as the one in question, being a part of the law of creation, declares the immunity of those who

SCOTTI v. RUTGERS UNIVERSITY HEALTHCARE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 13, 2022

There is a two-step inquiry into whether qualified immunity applies: (1) whether the official’s conduct violated a constitutional or federal right; and (2) whether the right at issue was clearly established. … Therefore, to be entitled to qualified immunity, Davis must show that Plaintiff’s constitutional right was not “clearly established” at the time of the violation.

FLORENTINO v. CITY OF NEWARK

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 28, 2021

“Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” White v. Pauly, 137 S. … (2011)), the Court again finds the Officer Defendants’ conduct to be within the scope of qualified immunity.

MINOR v. DILKS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 16, 2022

With the exception of cases involving “obvious violations” of prior Supreme Court rulings, a plaintiffs claim will only be “clearly established” where “the violative nature of the particular conduct [was] clearly established … Jan. 21, 2020) (“there is not any clearly established law determining the appropriate classification and housing of transgender inmates”), As there is no clearly established law supporting a Due Process claim premised

RODRIGUEZ v. THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 19, 2021

the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right” and “the right was clearly established” at the time of the objectionable conduct. … immunity test is two-pronged: whether plaintiff has alleged or shown a violation of a constitutional right, and whether the right at issue was “clearly established” at the time of the defendant

GONZALEZ v. ELIZABETH POLICE DEPARTMENT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 13, 2021

Hidalgo argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that “government officials performing discretionary functions . . . are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

MASSEY v. HENDRICKS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 25, 2020

Where a plaintiff’s claim fails to clear either hurdle, the officer is entitled to qualified immunity, and a reviewing court may therefore address only the clearly established prong where it is dispositive of the immunity … conduct [was] clearly established.”

Ciba-Geigy Corp. v. Alza Corp.

804 F. Supp. 614 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 23, 1992

Under these tests,, the Regents qualifies as an alter ego of California, and is entitled to Eleventh Amendment protection. … immunity.

LANKFORD v. CITY OF CLIFTON

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 29, 2021

The “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis “shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … But the qualified-immunity issue is the opposite: whether the plaintiff can establish that a violation was clearly established by then-existing precedent.

CONTE v. GOODWIN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 29, 2024

to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity also protects a government official from civil liability and suit “insofar as [his] conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would