Case law

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.

Ezagui v. City of New York

726 F. Supp. 2d 275 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 24, 2010

Defendant Harper is Not Entitled To Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages as a result of their performance of discretionary functions, and serves to protect … Defendants are entitled to dismissal on qualified immunity grounds where the rights allegedly violated were not clearly established at the time of the alleged constitutional deprivation, Islam v.

Chittenden v. Connors

460 F. Supp. 2d 463 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 26, 2006

Qualified immunity does not attach to this conduct, either. … Plaintiffs right as a public employee to comment on matters of public concern is clearly established.

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

Smith v. Gribetz

958 F. Supp. 145 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 6, 1997

Although declining to establish a bright-line test, the Second Circuit has observed that “in each of the cases we have reviewed where absolute immunity was upheld, some type of formal proceeding had been commenced or was … Conversely, where no proceedings have begun, qualified immunity is the norm.” Barbera, 836 F.2d at 100 . Subsequently, in Hill v.

Falchenberg v. New York State Department of Education

642 F. Supp. 2d 156 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 10, 2008

qualified to meet the program requirements; and (4) Defendants refused to make reasonable accommodations. … abrogation of that immunity by Congress.

RODRIGUEZ EX REL. KELLY v. McLoughlin

49 F. Supp. 2d 186 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 8, 1999

Qualified Immunity Individual defendants Marjorie McLoughlin and Barbara McMurray argue that they are immune from liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity "shields public officials from liability insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known, .

Lee-Walker v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.

220 F. Supp. 3d 484 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 23, 2016

Moreover, the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … But that general principle is insufficient to constitute a clearly established right that the defendants violated, because the Supreme Court has “repeatedly told courts not to define clearly established law at a high level

Olivera v. Town of Woodbury, New York

281 F. Supp. 2d 674 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 2, 2003

Qualified Immunity Because Lt. Shore is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the ground that he did not violate plaintiffs constitutional rights, the doctrine of qualified immunity is inapplicable. … Doe, 332 F.3d 68, 76-77 (2d Cir.2003) (discussing the doctrine of qualified immunity and reiterating that qualified immunity is an affirmative defense). VII.

Tancredi v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

256 F. Supp. 2d 196 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 8, 2003

Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 639 , 107 S.Ct. 3034 , 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987) (noting that application of qualified immunity standard for government officials — whether the conduct violates "clearly established statutory or constitutional … Leonard, 282 F.3d 123, 135 (2d Cir.2002) (stating that in order to determine whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, the relevant legal rule must be defined at the "appropriate level of particularity”). 15

Cooper v. City of New Rochelle

925 F. Supp. 2d 588 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 26, 2013

“Qualified immunity protects officials from liability for civil damages as long as ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Gilíes … “A public official is thus entitled to qualified immunity if (1) his [or her] conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known, or (2) it was objectively

Bishop v. Commodity Exchange, Inc.

581 F. Supp. 1278 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 28, 1984

The amended complaint, on the other hand, clearly alleges that the Governors’ advancement of their own interests was the dominant, not merely the incidental, motivation for their actions. … Defendants also reassert the argument that the complaint should be dismissed because the Governors are entitled to qualified immunity for their actions in establishing emergency rules.

Williams v. City of New York

121 F. Supp. 3d 354 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 5, 2015

Gorman, 536 U.S. 181, 185 , 122 S.Ct. 2097 , 153 L.Ed.2d 230 (2002). 10 To establish a violation of the ADA, the plaintiff must demonstrate (1) that she is a “qualified individual” with a disability; (2) that the defendants … Because municipal immunity is an extension of State immunity, the State’s waiver of sovereign immunity makes municipalities “answerable equally with individuals and private corporations for wrongs of officers and employees

Birmingham v. Ogden

70 F. Supp. 2d 353 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 8, 1999

Ogden’s request for qualified immunity is denied. … In general, public officials are entitled to qualified immunity if their conduct does not violate constitutional rights that were clearly established at the time the alleged violation occurred. See Harlow v.

Flores v. City of Mount Vernon

41 F. Supp. 2d 439 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 19, 1999

Hackett Turning to the motion to dismiss on the ground of qualified immunity, I first note that Defendants’ papers, and particularly its memorandum of law, are patently deficient. Clearly, Det. Sgt. … Hackett is not entitled to qualified immunity, and therefore, summary judgment can be entered in Plaintiffs favor against Det. Sgt.

Hoisington Ex Rel. Hoisington v. County of Sullivan

55 F. Supp. 2d 212 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 23, 1999

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) (holding that government officials may be subject to civil liability if their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Lewis, 87 F.3d 900, 902-03 (7th Cir.1996) (holding that city building inspectors were entitled to qualified immunity because the inspectors had a reasonable basis for believing that a building search was consented to and

Bowman v. City of Middletown

91 F. Supp. 2d 644 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 4, 2000

At the trial, his objective was the conviction of Grayson; at his deposition, it was to establish qualified immunity for himself. … qualified immunity must also be submitted to the jury.

Singleton v. City of Newburgh

1 F. Supp. 2d 306 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 6, 1998

The qualified immunity defense protects government actors performing discretionary functions from personal liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Freedom from the use of excessive force is a clearly established constitutional right. In Graham v.

Elliott v. British Tourist Authority

986 F. Supp. 189 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 17, 1997

Spain, 835 F.2d 160 (7th Cir.1987). *194 The court first examined the nature of plaintiffs duties and concluded that they did not involve the creation of government policy or its administration and that plaintiff did not qualify … There is clearly a significant nexus between the commercial activity of employment and plaintiffs claim of age discrimination.

Spafford v. Romanowsky

348 F. Supp. 2d 40 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 3, 2004

As government officials performing discretionary functions, a defendant enjoys a qualified immunity that shields him from personal liability for damages under section 1983 “insofar as [his] conduct does not violate clearly … Because probable cause existed to seize Spafford, Deputy Sheriff Romanowksi’s qualified immunity survives plaintiffs’ claim that her seizure was not reasonable or constitutional. D.