Case law

Delaney v. Selsky

899 F. Supp. 923 · District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 2, 1995

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue, again on the basis of Sandin , that Defendants Selsky and Mantel-lo are entitled to qualified immunity. … Delaney may well have had clearly-established due process rights in 1991 that he would not have, under the same circumstances, in 1995.

Blissett v. Eisensmidt

940 F. Supp. 449 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 18, 1996

The defendants in Blissett I raised only a general immunity defense in their amended answer; during the five year course of pre-trial litigation, they never addressed the qualified immunity defense; they did not seek to establish … And even though, eventually, she did give very cursory treatment to this defense in her pre-trial memorandum, she did not seek to establish a qualified immunity defense during the trial.

Brown v. Artus

647 F. Supp. 2d 190 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 11, 2009

Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Accordingly, governmental officials sued for damages “are entitled to qualified immunity if 1) their actions did not violate clearly established law, or 2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe that their actions

Alger v. County of Albany, New York

489 F. Supp. 2d 155 · District Court, N.D. New York · Nov 21, 2006

As the Second Circuit recently explained, The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … “A defendant is entitled to qualified immunity on a motion to dismiss if the allegations of the complaint fail to ‘state a claim of violation of clearly established law.’ ” Connell v.

The ANDERSON GROUP, LLC v. City of Saratoga Springs

557 F. Supp. 2d 332 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 25, 2008

Qualifíed Immunity The court turns next to the defendants’ assertion that the court erred in denying the council and board defendants qualified immunity. … A defendant will be entitled to qualified immunity if either (1) his actions did not violate clearly established law or (2) it was objectively reasonable for him to believe that his actions did not violate clearly established

Sealey v. Coughlin

857 F. Supp. 214 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 15, 1994

The qualified immunity doctrine insulates a governmental official performing discretionary functions from liability as long as his “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.”

Volberg v. Pataki

917 F. Supp. 909 · District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 28, 1996

Contrary to plaintiffs stated belief, defendants clearly do not concede that she has satisfied the four-point test of Manoharan and established a prima facie case. … Qualified Immunity Defense Defendants argue that they cannot be held liable for damages on plaintiffs remaining First Amendment claims because they are protected by the qualified, or good faith, immunity doctrine.

Samuels v. LeFevre

885 F. Supp. 32 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 14, 1995

In the alternative, Selsky and Trudo maintain that even if Samuels’ due process right was violated, the qualified immunity doctrine protects them from liability because this right was not clearly established at the time of … Once qualified immunity is pleaded, as it has been in this action, public officials performing discretionary functions are protected from personal liability unless their conduct “violated] clearly established statutory or

Butler v. South Glens Falls Central School District

106 F. Supp. 2d 414 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 27, 2000

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity “shields government officials performing discretionary functions from being held liable for civil damages arising from their actions which do ‘not violate clearly estab-fished … To defeat a qualified immunity defense in an IDEA case alleging the right to a free appropriate public education, a plaintiff must show that the right to a free appropriate education “was ‘clearly established’ in more than

Wagner

District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 8, 2026

Qualified Immunity Defendants contend that the federal claims against Connell are barred by the doctrine of qualified immunity. (Dkt. No. 31-6, at 10). … Wright, 386 F.3d 432, 434, 436 (2d Cir. 2004) (describing a defendant's burden of establishing a qualified immunity defense in a Rule 12(b)(6) motion as a “formidable hurdle”).

Redcross v. County of Rensselaer

511 F. Supp. 364 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 24, 1981

The Court stated: The fate of an official with qualified immunity depends upon the circumstances and motivations of his actions, as established by evidence at trial. See Scheuer v. … Under the doctrine of qualified good faith immunity, defendants, usually public officials and officers, have the burden to establish by a preponderance of evidence that they believed in good faith their actions were lawful

Maguire v. Coughlin

901 F. Supp. 101 · District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 18, 1995

Qualified Immunity Defendants raised qualified immunity as an affirmative defense. … “Once qualified immunity is pleaded, plaintiffs complaint will be dismissed unless defendant’s alleged conduct, when committed, violated ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Bradley v. RELL

703 F. Supp. 2d 109 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 26, 2010

Legal Standard Governing Doctrine of Qualified Immunity “Once qualified immunity is pleaded, plaintiffs complaint will be dismissed unless defendant’s alleged conduct, when committed, violated ‘clearly established statutory … Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 190 , 104 S.Ct. 3012 , 82 L.Ed.2d 139 (1984) ("Even defendants who violate [clearly established] constitutional rights enjoy a qualified immunity that protects them from liability for damages unless

Swindell v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

371 F. Supp. 2d 172 · District Court, N.D. New York · May 2, 2005

The sole basis for Defendants’ motion is that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity Roderick, the sole remaining defendant in this action, seeks summary judgment on the claims against him on the basis of qualified immunity.

Moore v. Keller

District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 7, 2021

“Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages liability ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001), to defeat qualified immunity a plaintiff must show that (1) the official violated a statutory or constitutional right (2) that was “clearly established” at the time of the challenged conduct

Hilton v. Wright

928 F. Supp. 2d 530 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 11, 2013

Qualiñed Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity protects state actors from liability if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Because the right in question here was clearly established, Dr.

Pearce v. Labella

971 F. Supp. 2d 255 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 20, 2013

As the Second Circuit has already held, Chief LaBella is not entitled to qualified immunity. F. … There is also adequate evidence to establish the personal involvement of Chief LaBella, who is not entitled to qualified immunity.

Blouin v. Spitzer

213 F. Supp. 2d 184 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 22, 2002

Qualified immunity protects public officials from civil liability if their actions were objectively reasonably, as evaluated in the context of legal rules that were clearly established at the time. See Poe v. … 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

Gill v. Hoadley

261 F. Supp. 2d 113 · District Court, N.D. New York · May 21, 2003

Accordingly, governmental officials sued for damages “are entitled to qualified immunity if 1) their actions did not violate clearly established law, or 2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe that their actions … Under the governing test, then, the qualified immunity analysis shifts in focus to whether the defendants’ actions either did not violate that clearly established law, or it was objectively reasonable for them to have believed

FELIX-TORRES v. Graham

521 F. Supp. 2d 157 · District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 17, 2007

E.Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Governmental officials “are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their actions did not violate clearly established law, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe that their actions did not violate such law