Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
2,281 results
0.78s
District Court, N.D. New York · Nov 30, 2021
violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Since “qualified immunity is an affirmative defense, it is incumbent upon the defendant to plead, and adequately develop, a qualified immunity defense during pretrial proceedings so that the trial court can determine which
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. New York · Dec 9, 2025
immunity, however, is sufficient to shield executive employees from civil liability under § 1983 if either “(1) their conduct ‘did not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have … known, or (2) ‘it was objectively reasonable to believe that [their] acts did not violate these clearly established rights.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. New York · Sep 8, 2026
Defendants’ qualified immunity defense fails, at least in this pre-answer posture. … Sept. 11, 2020) (dismissing jay- walking retaliatory arrest claim on qualified immunity grounds because although it “would seem to fall squarely within the Nieves framework,” the exception “was not clearly established at
Cited 0 timesUnknown620 F. Supp. 67 · District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 18, 1985
The NCAA advised Cornell that the transfer rule prohibits plaintiff’s participation this season and that plaintiff does not qualify for a waiver of the residency requirement under NCAA Bylaw 5-1-m. … The complaint also alleged that application of NCAA Bylaw 5 — 1—(j)—(7) unduly burdened plain *68 tiffs fundamental right to travel thereby depriving him of rights guaranteed by the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article
Cited 8 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. New York · Mar 31, 2026
The same genuinely disputed facts preclude qualified immunity. … “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.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. New York · Jul 2, 2026
Qualified Immunity "'The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … "Officials are entitled to qualified immunity unless a plaintiff can show '(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged
Cited 0 timesUnknown113 F. Supp. 2d 292 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 7, 2000
In this Circuit, “dismissal on speedy trial grounds generally qualifies, under New York law, as favorable termination.” Murphy v. … Judicial Immunity It is well established that a judicial officer is immune from a lawsuit seeking money damages. Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 9 , 112 S.Ct. 286 , 116 L.Ed.2d 9 (1991).
Cited 3 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. New York · Nov 24, 2025
Supp. 2d 389, 391 (S.D.N.Y.2000) (“It is well established that under the doctrine of sovereign immunity, no person may sue the federal government absent its consent to be sued.”). … “[A] waiver of sovereign immunity must be ‘unequivocally expressed’ in statutory text” and its scope is construed strictly in favor of immunity. Federal Aviation Administration v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. New York · Mar 9, 2026
"'Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability for civil damages when one of two conditions is satisfied: (a) the defendant's action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable … The Court is likewise unaware of any clearly established law which holds that a delay in returning such property is unconstitutional.
Cited 0 timesUnknownHiller v. Bd. of Educ. of Brunswick Cent. Sch. D.
687 F. Supp. 735 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 2, 1988
Given the Second Circuit’s interpretation of section 1415(f), a section 1983 action clearly is a viable cause of action for this plaintiff. … Eleventh Amendment Immunity The State defendants contend that because the EACHA does not expressly abrogate the State’s sovereign immunity under the eleventh amendment, plaintiff is barred from seeking retroactive monetary
Cited 3 timesPublishedWalker v. New York State Department of Correction and Community Supervision
District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 29, 2025
And even were Yelich and Barton entitled to qualified immunity as to the denial of Plaintiff’s applications to be a facilitator—a determination which would be premature at this stage—such immunity would not apply to the … For the reasons explained above, the Court again declines to consider Defendants’ qualified immunity arguments. See Fayton, 704 F.
Cited 0 timesUnknown275 F. Supp. 2d 279 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 8, 2003
Because this Court clearly lacks subject matter jurisdiction to entertain plaintiffs’ claims as more fully discussed below, their complaint must be dismissed. III. DISCUSSION A. … There are no allegations suggesting or facts establishing that defendants attempted to remove plaintiffs from Oneida Nation lands.
Cited 5 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. New York · Sep 25, 2025
However, Judge Katz found “no due process concerns” because Defendants’ “notice of motion for summary judgment clearly noted Defendants are seeking summary judgment on all claims.” … immunity defense, Judge Katz found it “unnecessary to reach Defendants qualified immunity argument” given his recommendation that the Motion be granted on other grounds.
Cited 0 timesUnknownAtkinson v. New York State Olympic Regional Development Authority
822 F. Supp. 2d 182 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 30, 2011
Standard of Review The standard of review under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) is well established and will not be repeated here. … Complaints of gender-based employment discrimination generally fail to qualify as protected speech because such complaints are typically personal in nature and relate solely to the employee’s unique employment situation as
Cited 7 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. New York · Nov 7, 2019
Qualified Immunity Amato and Franko argue that even if Plaintiffs can establish personal involvement, they are entitled to qualified immunity. (Dkt. … is not clearly established.”
Cited 0 timesUnknown733 F. Supp. 538 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 14, 1990
do not argue that political affiliation was a legitimate consideration for continued employment as the Data Processing Supervisor, see Branti, 445 U.S. at 519 , 100 S.Ct. at 1295 ; rather, defendants argue that they have clearly … The court adds that defendants' argument that they have qualified immunity with respect to this claim is without merit inasmuch as the law in this area was clearly established at the time of plaintiff's removal from the Data
Cited 7 timesPublishedGalusha v. NEW YORK STATE DEPT. ENVIRON. CONSERV.
27 F. Supp. 2d 117 · District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 9, 1998
The APA, the DEC, and the State of New York all qualify as public entities under the ADA. c. … CONCLUSION The balance of equities in this case clearly rests with the Plaintiffs. Their harm is irreparable and incalculable.
Cited 0 timesPublished549 F. Supp. 2d 204 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 20, 2008
Servs., 436 U.S. 658 , 98 S.Ct. 2018 , 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978), and *209 its progeny; (4) the doctrine of collateral estoppel; and/or (5) the doctrine of qualified immunity. (See generally Dkt. No. 52, Part 10 [Defs.’ … final alternative argument in favor of dismissal, namely, their qualified immunity argument.
Cited 143 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. New York · Feb 5, 2024
No. 1 (the “Complaint”), pursuant to Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 12”), and on Eleventh Amendment immunity and qualified immunity grounds, Dkt. … As an initial matter, Cushman’s arguments concerning qualified immunity and Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity are unavailing.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. New York · Jun 21, 2022
"Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, 'government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … "For a right to be clearly established, it is not necessary to identify a case directly on point.
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna