Case law

Madera v. Goord

103 F. Supp. 2d 536 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 28, 2000

As stated above, the violation of state regulations alone does not rise to the level of a constitutional violation. 4 In any event, the defendant would be entitled to qualified immunity based upon the lack of an established … Qualified immunity protects defendants from liability for acts which do not violate a clearly established constitutional right of which a reasonable defendant would have known. Scotto v.

Gage v. New York State Department of Health

204 F. Supp. 2d 399 · District Court, N.D. New York · May 29, 2002

Qualiñed Immunity Defendants also argue that No-vello is entitled to qualified immunity from plaintiffs’ remaining causes of action be *403 cause her actions in interpreting and applying ADM-8 were reasonable, in that she … Qualified immunity is not a defense to a cause of action seeking prospective equitable relief. See Nicholas v. Miller, 189 F.3d 191, 195 (2d Cir.1999) (citing Rodriguez v.

Torres v. Faxton St. Lukes Healthcare

227 F. Supp. 3d 216 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 3, 2017

“In general, public officials are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their conduct does not violate a clearly established right, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe that their acts did not violate … “But that does not mean that qualified immunity can never be established at the pleading stage. To the contrary, every case *235 must be assessed on the specific facts alleged in the complaint.” Garcia, 779 F.3d at 97 .

Morgan v. Ward

699 F. Supp. 1025 · District Court, N.D. New York · Nov 7, 1988

On the other hand, if the constitutional or statutory law at issue was clearly established at the time it was violated, the state official who violated it is not, absent extraordinary circumstances, protected by the qualified … In order to resolve defendants’ qualified immunity argument, the court must determine whether the Adjustment Committee procedures offended due process principles that were “clearly established” at any point during the periods

Garcia v. New York State Police Investigator

138 F. Supp. 2d 298 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 29, 2001

Qualified Immunity Even assuming, arguendo, Defendants violated Plaintiffs constitutional rights, for the following reasons, they would, nonetheless, be entitled to qualified immunity. 1. … Search Turning to the search of Plaintiffs person, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Mayes v. Village of Hoosick Falls

162 F. Supp. 3d 67 · District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 12, 2016

Qualified Immunity In the alternative, defendants move for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability where either “(a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, of (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant to believe that his action

Romaine v. Rawson

140 F. Supp. 2d 204 · District Court, N.D. New York · Apr 17, 2001

Qualified Immunity The affirmative defense of qualified immunity “shields public officials from liability for their discretionary acts that do ‘not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … Defendant, in his post trial brief, claims that he is entitled to qualified immunity.

Griffin v. Doe

71 F. Supp. 3d 306 · District Court, N.D. New York · Dec 23, 2014

Finally, Plaintiff asserts that Defendant(s) are not entitled to qualified immunity. See id. at 7-8. B. … To the extent that Plaintiffs discussion of qualified immunity can be read as objecting to Magistrate Judge Baxter’s finding that Plaintiff has failed to allege constitutional violations with sufficient specificity to state

Knicrumah v. Albany City School District

241 F. Supp. 2d 199 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 16, 2003

The defense of qualified immunity “shields government actors from liability if they did not violate clearly established law, or if it was objectively reasonable for such actors to believe that their actions did not violate … clearly established law.”

Bush ex rel. Estate of Bush v. City of Utica

948 F. Supp. 2d 246 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 4, 2013

Qualified Immunity Similarly, defendants maintain that Chief Brooks is entitled to qualified immunity because no constitutional violations occurred. … Accordingly, Chief Brooks is not entitled to qualified immunity. C.

Bellnier v. Lund

438 F. Supp. 47 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 11, 1977

Damages It is well settled that school officials possess a qualified good faith immunity with respect to acts performed within the course of their duties. Wood v. … A compensatory award will be appropriate only if the school board member has acted with such an impermissible motivation or with such disregard of the student’s clearly established constitutional rights that his action cannot

Trudeau v. New York State Consumer Protection Board

237 F.R.D. 325 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 21, 2006

Qualified immunity will shield "government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate 'clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … In order for the constitutional right to be clearly established, three elements must be met: "1) ...

Simons v. New York

472 F. Supp. 2d 253 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 31, 2007

Qualiñed Immunity Even though defendants are not entitled to summary judgment on plaintiffs’ false arrest claim based on the existence of probable cause, they may still avoid liability under the qualified immunity doctrine … Under that doctrine, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Ferguson

District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 26, 2026

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … In the instant case, Defendants focus the argument for their qualified immunity defense solely on the second prong – that their conduct did not violate clearly established law. See Mot. at 5–8.

Scott v. Sinagra

167 F. Supp. 2d 509 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 16, 2001

Qualified Immunity An officer receives qualified immunity in an arrest lacking probable cause when “(a) it was objectively reasonable for the officer to believe that probable cause existed, or (b) officers of reasonable competence … Accepting the facts most favorable to the plaintiff, the defendant officers are not entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law.

Gardiner v. Incorporated Village of Endicott

838 F. Supp. 32 · District Court, N.D. New York · Nov 26, 1993

immunity. … Based on this bald assertion alone, the court finds no evidence of a conspiracy that would have made it proper to transfer the issue of qualified immunity to the jury.

Neville v. Dearie

745 F. Supp. 99 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 17, 1990

established legal rights.” 7 As with his claims asserted against the Grievance Committee and the Appellate Division defendants, Neville’s claim against Abrams, filed in March of 1987, was dismissed by Judge Weinstein. … Maraio, 722 F.2d 1013 (2d Cir.1983), the Second Circuit held that a court reporter acting at the direction of a judge is immunized from liability under section 1983 by the defense of qualified immunity for actions carried

Dunbar v. County of Saratoga

358 F. Supp. 2d 115 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 3, 2005

Qualified immunity “shields government officials from liability for damages on account of their performance of discretionary official functions insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Therefore, a qualified immunity defense is established when “(a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant to believe that his action did not violate

Weldon v. United States

744 F. Supp. 408 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 13, 1990

First, it contends that plaintiff has offered no evidence to establish that her 1979 illness was GBS. … Plaintiff has, however, neither tendered an affidavit or deposition testimony, nor identified a qualified expert who will testify that she suffered from GBS.

Malerba v. Selsky

872 F. Supp. 1136 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 10, 1995

it to exactly the constitutional scrutiny provided under qualified immunity. … Thus, this court finds that the importance of the precedent factor, as it fits into the scheme of hearing disposition review, has not been established to the degree necessary to favor absolute immunity. V.