Case law

Doe v. Big Walnut Local School District Board of Education

837 F. Supp. 2d 742 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 27, 2011

Qualified Immunity The aforementioned discussion addresses each of Plaintiffs’ claims and concludes that Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on all of Plaintiffs’ claims. … Therefore, the Court does not find it is necessary to address Defendants’ qualified immunity argument. IY.

Pullen v. Tabor

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 13, 2024

to qualified immunity. … To decide whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, the Court must determine whether the alleged conduct violated a constitutional right and, if so, whether that right was clearly established. Jones v.

Brown v. Giles

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 3, 2023

Giles argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity, because Brown has not adequately alleged that Giles violated a clearly established constitutional right. … The district court denied qualified immunity to the officer, but the Sixth Circuit reversed. Id. at 498.

Siddle v. City of Cambridge, Ohio

761 F. Supp. 503 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 2, 1991

Alternatively, with these facts and circumstances, Defendants could have relied on qualified immunity to protect them in their individual capacity. … Plaintiff alleges no statutory violation resulting from the Defendant’s actions or inaction which denies them the benefit of the qualified immunity defense. 4 .

Gipson v. Hamilton County Common Pleas Court

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 15, 2023

“Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions unless their conduct violates a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable person in the official’s … Thus, when a defendant raises qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show that (1) “a constitutional violation has occurred” and (2) “the violation involved a clearly established constitutional right of which a reasonable

Zimmerman v. Knight

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 14, 2019

An official is entitled to the defense of qualified immunity so long as he has not violated a “clearly established statutory or constitutional right[] of which a reasonable person would have known.” Pearson v. … Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.

Kareva v. United States

9 F. Supp. 3d 838 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 27, 2014

Moreover, the record does not indicate that the Immigration Judge or the respondent’s former attorney ever qualified the respondent for this relief. … The reservation of immunity in Section 2680(a) and the waiver of immunity in Section 2680(h) create a conflict when law enforcement officers commit intentional torts while performing discretionary functions.

Scioto County Regional Water District No. 1 v. Scioto Water, Inc.

916 F. Supp. 692 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 15, 1995

In its opinion dismissing Water l’s claims, the Court noted that the question of whether an entity in Water l’s position qualifies as an indebted association entitled to the protections of § 1926(b) is unsettled. … Quik Shops, Inc., 55 Ohio App.2d 51 , 9 0.0.3d 216, 379 N.E.2d 235 (1977)), Water 1 contends that is immune from liability under the applicable law.

Welton v. Osborn

124 F. Supp. 2d 1114 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 15, 2000

Finally, Welton argued that his request for attorney’s fees and expenses was reasonable because he qualified as the “prevailing party.” … He insisted, however, that such mutually beneficial efforts could be billed as attorney’s fees in this case, because it clearly was *1119 related to this case.

Bates v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 5, 2023

But when qualified immunity is raised is different from when it is granted. … right, and (2) that the unconstitutionality of their conduct was clearly established when they acted.”

Williams v. Javitch, Block & Rathbone, LLP

480 F. Supp. 2d 1016 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 22, 2007

It is not Williams’ burden to establish that these documents are not accurate at this stage of the proceedings. … JB & R’s Immunity and Constitutional Arguments.

Bates v. O'Connor

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 18, 2025

Notably, qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Here, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity in their individual capacities on the record presented because Plaintiff has failed to show that any Defendant violated any clearly established constitutional right of

King v. City of Columbus

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 3, 2021

Police officers receive a qualified immunity from suit unless (1) the officer violated the Constitution or laws of the United States, and (2) at the time, the right at issue was clearly established. Saucier v. … The Sixth Circuit concluded that on Dickerson’s version of the facts, the officer was not entitled to qualified immunity as the officer had violated Dickerson’s clearly established right “to be free from excessive force

Belcher v. Ohio Department of Human Services

48 F. Supp. 2d 729 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 9, 1999

To establish such a policy, the plaintiff must clearly demonstrate some “over-arching policy of discrimination,” and not merely the occurrence of isolated incidents of discrimination. See Janikowski v. … This right is clearly established pursuant to 45 C.F.R. §§ 80.6 (d) and 80.4(b)(2). Thus, by federal regulation, Plaintiff had an established right to be notified of her right to pursue civil rights actions.

Peterson v. Johnson

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 13, 2022

In opposition, Plaintiff argues that discovery should be stayed at most as to the individual-capacity claims to which qualified immunity might apply; case law establishes that discovery as to Plaintiff’s official-capacity … Yet only some of Plaintiff’s claims are subject to a qualified immunity defense. Plaintiff’s official-capacity claims for injunctive relief will not be affected by the Court’s immunity ruling.

Meadows v. Coppick

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 3, 2022

Defendants also contend that because plaintiff’s allegations do not show that defendants violated plaintiff’s clearly established rights, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiff’s failure to intervene … that violated clearly established law.”

Ohio Student Loan Commission v. Cavazos

709 F. Supp. 1411 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 10, 1989

One hundred percent reinsurance first became available in 1976, and the OSLC has qualified for that level of reinsurance from that time to the present. … The plain meaning of the statutory language clearly does not support a reinsurance fee characterization.

Wilson v. Gregory

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2020

Huelsman’s constitutional rights, they still would be entitled to qualified immunity because any constitutional violation was not clearly established. … Although the wisdom of qualified immunity has come into question in recent months, this is clearly a case where qualified immunity is necessary and proper.

JOSEPH PINCKNEY v. R. KEENY, et al.

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 10, 2026

Qualified Immunity Defendants also contend that the Magistrate Judge erred in finding that Spradlin is not entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages liability unless the plaintiff plausibly alleges that the official violated a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged

Caskey v. Fenton

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 1, 2022

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Qualified immunity is a two-step analysis: this Court must determine whether the officers violated Plaintiff’s constitutional rights, and if so, whether those rights were clearly established at the time.