Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersohsd

2,956 results

0.38s

  • Sollenberger v. Sollenberger

    173 F. Supp. 3d 608 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 25, 2016

    clearly established constitutional right. … Sept. 29, 2006) (stating R.C, 311.05 establishes qualified immunity for a sheriff).

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Fitzpatrick v. Meyer

    809 F. Supp. 1299 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 9, 1992

    A defendant is entitled to summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds if he shows in light of clearly established principles that he could, as a matter of law, reasonably have believed that his actions were lawful. … The Defendants assert that qualified immunity is proper because “Cribett’s actions and those of his superior Mackey and his employer MRDD did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights which Defendant

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Hora v. Risner

    District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 24, 2021

    immunity analysis is whether the law was clearly established. 2. … Clearly Established Law? In Plumhoff v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Doe v. University of Cincinnati

    173 F. Supp. 3d 586 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 23, 2016

    A public official is entitled to qualified immunity and thus shielded from suit under § 1983, for his . actions if his conduct.does not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable … When a defendant raises qualified immunity as a defense, as the Defendants have doné' in this case, the plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that the defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity, Everson v.

    Cited 31 timesPublished
  • Shoup v. Doyle

    974 F. Supp. 2d 1058 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 24, 2013

    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 … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) and stating that “once the [defendants] raise qualified immunity, Jackson must plead the violation of a clearly established constitutional right”)).

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Johnson v. Wolgemuth

    257 F. Supp. 2d 1013 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 10, 2003

    established and that the Defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity. … established right, qualified immunity cannot attach on summary judgment. 882 F.2d at 215-16 .

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Caddell v. Campbell

    District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 28, 2021

    Separately, he argues that even if a jailor could bear legal liability in that setting, it was not clearly established that a jailor could, and thus qualified immunity is warranted. (Id. at #209–213). … To succeed on his qualified immunity defense, on the other hand, Jones must establish that Cadell failed to allege that Jones’s “conduct violated a constitutional right that was clearly established law at the time.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Ohio Ex Rel. Manuel v. Ohio Department of Health

    810 F. Supp. 928 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 2, 1992

    An official is entitled to qualified immunity if his actions are objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). … Defendants have qualified immunity unless Plaintiff’s “rights were so clearly established when the acts were committed that any officer in the [Defendant’s position, measured objectively, would have clearly understood that

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Kinkus v. Village of Yorkville

    476 F. Supp. 2d 829 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 13, 2007

    Next, the Court must determine whether Plaintiffs rights under the First and Four Amendments are “clearly established” in this case for purposes of qualified immunity. … Rather than directing his argument to the second step of the qualified immunity analysis, the “clearly established” prong, Officer Popp focuses all of his arguments on the first prong. None of these arguments is novel.

    Reversed on other grounds by Kinkus v. Village of Yorkville, 289 F. App'x 86 (2008)Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Gregg v. Ohio Department of Youth Services

    661 F. Supp. 2d 842 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 22, 2009

    Telb, 831 F.2d 673 (6th Cir.1987), when the defense of qualified immunity is raised, a plaintiff must include in the pleadings factual allegations necessary to support the conclusion that the defendants violated clearly established … Gregg’s constitutional rights, it is unnecessary to reach the “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity as to these defendants. See Bukowski v. City of Akron, 326 F.3d 702, 708 (6th Cir.2003).

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Watkins v. Millennium School

    290 F. Supp. 2d 890 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 18, 2003

    Qualified immunity extends to individuals performing discretionary functions, unless their actions violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Id. … In elaborating on “clearly established,” the Supreme Court stated in Anderson v.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • LeFever v. Ferguson

    956 F. Supp. 2d 819 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 9, 2013

    Raker’s qualified immunity defense. … clearly established as early as 1964.”

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Shevlin v. Cheatham

    211 F. Supp. 2d 963 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 7, 2002

    Qualified immunity extends to individuals performing discretionary functions, unless their actions violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Id. … immunity because he violated clearly established rights.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Paige v. Coyner

    867 F. Supp. 2d 975 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 29, 2012

    Qualified Immunity Defendants next urge the Court to find that Defendant Coyner is entitled to qualified immunity. … Defendants assert that Coyner is entitled to immunity because Plaintiff has not shown that the constitutional right she claims was violated was clearly established at the time (doc. 39).

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Stevens-Rucker v. City of Columbus

    242 F. Supp. 3d 608 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 16, 2017

    Qualified Immunity It is well-established that “[p]o-lice officers are immune from civil liability unless, in the course of performing their discretionary functions, they violate the plaintiffs clearly established constitutional … Accordingly, Frenz is entitled to qualified immunity for his use of force against White because Plaintiff has failed to establish either prong of the two-part test.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Siefert v. Hamilton Cnty. Bd. of Comm'rs

    354 F. Supp. 3d 815 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 15, 2018

    "The doctrine of 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 … Williams-Ash , this Court cannot conclude that County Defendants have violated a clearly established procedural due process right. The County Defendants therefore are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. c.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • M.P., a Minor v. Monroe Local Schools

    District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2021

    "An official sued under §1983 is entitled to qualified immunity unless it is shown that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was 'clearly established' at the time of the challenged conduct." … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982) (Qualified immunity shields "government officials performing discretionary functions . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Harris v. Adams

    410 F. Supp. 2d 707 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 20, 2005

    First, in determining whéther a constitutional right is clearly established, the court must first look to decisions of the U.S. … A public official is entitled to qualified immunity and thus protected from liability under § 1983 for his actions if his conduct does not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Webb v. Greene County Sheriff's Office

    494 F. Supp. 2d 779 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 6, 2007

    Even where an officer has violated a plaintiffs constitutional rights, that officer is entitled to qualified immunity if the right that he violated was not “clearly established” at the time of the violation. … As the right that Keller is accused of violating was clearly established at the time of the *795 arrest, he is not entitled to qualified immunity. 4.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Gillman v. Schlagetter

    777 F. Supp. 2d 1084 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 30, 2010

    Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability for civil damages, and protects them from the burdens of litigation, if his conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitu *1097 tional rights … When a Plaintiff asserts the defense of qualified immunity, he must establish the right allegedly violated to be established to the extent that a reasonable person in the position of the defendant would have clearly understood

    Cited 5 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.