Case law

Trivedi v. N.Y.S. Unified Court System Office of Court Administration

818 F. Supp. 2d 712 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 26, 2011

Magistrate Judge Maas then found that Plaintiffs’ claims did not qualify for either of the two exceptions to sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment, which apply where (1) there has been a clear abrogation of the … While there are two exceptions to sovereign immunity, Trivedi’s ADA claim does not qualify for either.

Edrei v. City of New York

254 F. Supp. 3d 565 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 31, 2017

Defendants’ qualified immunity defense at the motion to dismiss stage is unavailing. … A defendant is 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

Velez v. Levy

274 F. Supp. 2d 444 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 29, 2003

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 … Consequently, with respect to these claims, the defendants could not have violated the clearly established constitutional rights of the plaintiff, and they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Betances v. Fischer

304 F.R.D. 416 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 28, 2015

qualified immunity for their actions. … Therefore the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity.

Lindsey v. Butler

43 F. Supp. 3d 317 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 29, 2014

Defendants contend that Plaintiffs claims against Detective Butler must be dismissed under the doctrine of qualified immunity because Detective Butler’s alleged conduct was objectively reasonable and did not violate a clearly … Courts in this Circuit have made clear that, “[s]ince the law in this area is well-established, in Fourth Amendment unreasonable force cases, ... the qualified immunity inquiry is the same as the inquiry made on the merits

Boddie v. Coughlin

583 F. Supp. 352 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 27, 1984

Boddie has not cited any “clearly established” rights that were violated by these decisions, and I am unaware of any such rights. … Therefore, I find that defendants Coughlin and Scully are entitled to qualified immunity which has not been alleged to be overridden by plaintiff.

Neu v. Corcoran

695 F. Supp. 1552 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 22, 1988

The Court in that case held that public officials are entitled to qualified immunity unless the actions taken were clearly proscribed by law. … Therefore law forbidding such conduct was extant, and the Defendants can not avail themselves of qualified immunity.

Mascetta v. Miranda

957 F. Supp. 1346 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 5, 1997

The Second Circuit has stated that when a defense of qualified immunity is raised in the context of a retaliatory claim, a court must decide first whether a clearly established right is at stake, and second, whether the conduct … immunity test — whether a clearly established right is at stake.

Alan Guttmacher Institute v. McPherson

597 F. Supp. 1530 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 6, 1984

For that reason, it is not surprising that courts have chafed under the limits established by Larson’s eleventh footnote. … Lehman is useful to plaintiffs because it states, clearly enough, that sovereign immunity does not bar affirmative injunctive relief in actions alleging a constitutional violation.

Rivera v. City of Yonkers

470 F. Supp. 2d 402 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 18, 2007

Qualified Immunity Because this Court has concluded that Plaintiff has not established that Defendants’ actions violated a constitutional right, it is not necessary to address Defendants’ alternative defense of qualified … immunity.

Purdy v. Town of Greenburgh

166 F. Supp. 2d 850 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 26, 2001

Qualified Immunity Defendants move to dismiss the claim of individual liability against Kapica on the grounds that he is entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983. For the following reasons, we disagree. … Here, there is no dispute that age discrimination is contrary to clearly established federal law.

Byram River v. Village of Port Chester, New York

394 F. Supp. 618 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 8, 1975

by the DEC for federal funding of sewage treatment plants, defendant Port Chester would qualify for Federal funding in the current fiscal year. … Defendant Thomas Glenn Since we have held that the Interstate Commission cannot claim the protection of the Eleventh Amendment, it is certainly axiomatic that the director of this agency also fails to qualify for immunity

Reading & Bates Corp. v. National Iranian Oil Co.

478 F. Supp. 724 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 27, 1979

A money judgment has been demanded and would be available against the defendants for conversion and the defendant is a foreign corporation not qualified to do business in New York. … For the above reasons, I believe that even if plaintiffs had sustained their burden of establishing the need for continuing the levy and probability of success on the merits, NIOC would be immune from pre-judgment attachment

Knox v. Palestine Liberation Organization

306 F. Supp. 2d 424 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 1, 2004

As the parties invoking foreign state immunity, Defendants have the burden of establishing its existence under the FSIA, or, given the conflict with prevailing United States public policy discussed above, of otherwise producing … Accordingly, the PLO, by itself, would clearly not satisfy the control requirement. Cf.

Largo v. Vacco

977 F. Supp. 268 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 18, 1997

Qualified 'Immunity Defendant Page merely signed a letter, and the only discretionary function which Defendant Vacco performed is that he directed a re-evaluation of the employees to be conducted by his subordinates, and … However, it is not a case which implicates qualified immunity.

Putkowski v. Warwick Valley Central School District

363 F. Supp. 2d 649 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 30, 2005

immunity granted by the Eleventh Amendment. … However, plaintiffs Rehabilitation Act claim is clearly barred by the statute of limitations. As a result, I must dismiss the claim with prejudice.

Morris v. Eversley

205 F. Supp. 2d 234 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 13, 2002

Qualified Immunity Defendants alternatively argue that, in the event Morris’s § 1983 claims are viable, they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Accordingly, at this juncture, defendants are not entitled to the protection of qualified immunity. 4.

Montero v. Crusie

153 F. Supp. 2d 368 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 27, 2001

See 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . 2 In § 1983 actions, “[p]ublic officials are entitled to qualified immunity from claims for damages if (1) their conduct did not violate federal statutory or constitutional rights that were clearly … Therefore, defendants Jones and Crusie are entitled to qualified immunity for their actions in the pushing *375 incident and their motion for summary judgment as to this claim is granted. 2.

Cunningham v. Bronx County Democratic Executive Committee

420 F. Supp. 1004 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 22, 1976

To threaten to strip Cunningham of his party position is, given these powers and perquisites, clearly coercive. … Such cases are clearly inapposite. Cunningham is neither a prisoner nor, indeed, an accused.

O'Connell MacHinery Co., Inc. v. MV AMERICANA

566 F. Supp. 1381 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 9, 1983

In our view this establishes that Italian Line is, indeed, an “agency or instrumentality of a foreign state,” as defined in 28 U.S.C. § 1603 (b). … Whereas it is conceded that IRI may qualify as a “foreign state,” plaintiff argues that the chain of ownership so far removes Italian Line from direct government control as to make it “ ‘too remote’ to be considered as a