Case law

Acciardo v. Millennium Securities Corp.

83 F. Supp. 2d 413 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 15, 2000

In recent years, courts have overwhelmingly granted Form U-5 statements qualified, rather than absolute, immunity. 8 Qualified immunity serves the- industry purpose while protecting the interests of the employee. … Under a qualified immunity standard, the employee has the opportunity to dissolve the immunity if she can demonstrate that the former employer spoke with malice. See Liberman v.

Forras v. Andros

470 F. Supp. 2d 283 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 29, 2005

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that the doctrine of qualified immunity precludes discovery. This Court disagrees. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are shielded from liability flowing from their performance of discretionary functions as long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

Vega v. State University of New York Board of Trustees

67 F. Supp. 2d 324 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 28, 1999

Accordingly, the First Amendment right to academic freedom was clearly established in the summer of 1994 and this argument by the SUNY Defendants in support of their claim of qualified immunity is rejected. b. … The attempt to invoke the defense of qualified immunity on the ground that the right to a predeprivation hearing was not clearly established in the summer of 1994, therefore, fails.

Cahill v. O'DONNELL

75 F. Supp. 2d 264 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 7, 1999

Qualified immunity entitles public officers to be shielded from liability unless their conduct violates clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known, or unless it was objectively … “Where there is a total absence of retaliation, there is no basis on which to conclude that the defendant seeking qualified immunity violated clearly established law.” McCullough v.

Webster v. City of New York

333 F. Supp. 2d 184 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 27, 2004

First, government officials “are immune from liability if their conduct does not violate ‘clearly established’ statutory or constitutional rights the existence of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Defendants do not dispute that Plaintiffs’ asserted rights were clearly established as of August 31, 2002.

Jean-Laurent v. Wilkinson

540 F. Supp. 2d 501 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 24, 2008

immunity. … QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

Degrafinreid v. Ricks

417 F. Supp. 2d 403 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 23, 2006

Defendants argue that Barr and Beebee are entitled to qualified immunity. … Public officials are “immune from liability for money damages in suits brought against them in their individual capacities if ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

Anemone v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority

410 F. Supp. 2d 255 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 24, 2006

Qualified Immunity Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … to such conduct was not “clearly established” at the time of the conduct or (2) the defendant’s challenged action was objectively reasonable in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken

Davidson v. COUGHLIN, III

968 F. Supp. 121 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 19, 1997

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY At the very least, the defendants in these cases are entitled to qualified immunity. … A district court should grant summary judgment on a claim of qualified immunity if: the asserted rights were not clearly established, or if the evidence is such that, even when it is viewed in the light most favorable to

Rodriguez v. McClenning

399 F. Supp. 2d 228 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 22, 2005

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects state officials from civil liability for “actions performed in the course of their duties if ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … In his motion for summary judgment, McClenning argued that he is entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity because sexual assault is not a clearly established Eighth Amendment violation.

Weaver v. NEW YORK CITY EMP. RETIREMENT SYSTEM

717 F. Supp. 1039 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 21, 1989

Qualified immunity shields officials from liability for damages "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." *1043 457 U.S … Certainly, defendants' actions were not so arbitrary as to violate any clearly established constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known.

Mazza v. Hendrick Hudson Central School District

942 F. Supp. 187 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 8, 1996

A school official is entitled to qualified immunity from a § 1983 action insofar as his conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known, or even … Defendants maintain that (1) their conduct did not violate a clearly established right, and (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe that their conduct did not violate any clearly established right.

Sullivan v. Schweikhard

968 F. Supp. 910 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 24, 1997

Qualified Immunity Under the doctrine of qualified immunity “government officials performing discretionary function[s], generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … Because an inmate’s right not to be subject to retaliatory conduct in response to the exercise of his constitutional rights was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged violations, qualified immunity cannot shield

Costello v. Milano

20 F. Supp. 3d 406 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 6, 2014

under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … clearly established at the time it was taken.

King v. MacRi

800 F. Supp. 1157 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 11, 1992

First, “[pjublic officials are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages____ [a]s long as their conduct does not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right.” Mozzochi v. … Second, even when a defendant has violated a plaintiff’s rights, qualified immunity is available if defendant's actions were objectively reasonable, “assessed in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at

Herzog v. Will

931 F. Supp. 276 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 23, 1996

it was objectively reasonable for the defendants .to believe that they were acting in a fashion that did not violate a clearly established right. … It “emphasize[d] ... that the appealable issue is a purely legal one: whether the facts alleged ... support a claim of violation of clearly established law.” ...

Adams v. City of New York

226 F. Supp. 3d 261 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 22, 2016

“Qualified immunity protects public officials performing discretionary functions from personal liability in a civil suit for damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … An officer “is entitled to qualified immunity against a suit for false arrest if he can establish that he had arguable probable cause to arrest the plaintiff.” Garcia v.

Costa v. City of New York

546 F. Supp. 2d 117 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 29, 2008

Fox seeks dismissal also on the ground of qualified immunity, and both defendants seek dismissal of so much of the claim as purports to allege constructive discharge. … Qualified Immunity Defendant Chief Fox seeks dismissal on the ground of qualified immunity.

Collins v. Goord

581 F. Supp. 2d 563 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 22, 2008

The defendants also argue that the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because it was reasonable for them to believe that their actions did not violate clearly established law. … The doctrine of qualified immunity provides “that government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Yeshiva Chofetz Chaim Radin, Inc. v. Village of New Hempstead

98 F. Supp. 2d 347 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 12, 2000

defendant was “arguably entitled to a qualified immunity under Federal law” in the federal claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ). … The standards for granting summary judgment motions in the federal courts are clearly established in FRCP Rule 56 and federal case law, see Standard of Review Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c), supra, and