Case law

Chapman v. Board of County Commissioners of Oklahoma County

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · May 26, 2021

To overcome the defense of qualified immunity, Plaintiff must additionally show that the defendant’s actions violated clearly established law. … Courts must take care not to define clearly established law “at a high level of generality” and should instead determine “whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.” Mullenix v.

Draper v. Phelps

351 F. Supp. 677 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Sep 6, 1972

. §§ 2201 and 2202 to declare and to define the rights and legal relations of the parties and to secure Plaintiffs’ rights, privileges and immunities under the Constitution of the United States. … Other courts have held that the power should not be exercised unless the statute is so clearly violative of constitutional rights of litigants as to leave no reasonable doubt as to the invalidity of the statute. 16 Am.Jur.Const.Law

Bointy v. State of Oklahoma

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jun 12, 2024

Individual defendants named in a § 1983 action may raise a defense of qualified immunity, which shields public officials from damages action unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” … The question remaining is whether Bointy has satisfied the second prong of the qualified immunity test—whether the violated right was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s complained-of conduct.

German v. Rhoades

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 17, 2021

clearly established when the alleged violation occurred. … The court stated the “arguable probable cause” standard is a different way to articulate the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity analysis in the context of a warrantless arrest. Id.

Godsey v. Mitchell

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 22, 2021

Further, Wood argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because plaintiffs have not shouldered their burden to show that he violated Micheal’s clearly established constitutional rights. … clearly established law.

Holbert v. Cimarron County Sheriff's Department

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 12, 2021

P. 12(b)(6) and that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … rights and that the right was clearly established.”

Wayne M Fournerat Esquire v. Deguisti

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 14, 2025

Further, even if Judge DeGiusti is not entitled to absolute judicial immunity, he is entitled to qualified immunity. … To overcome the presumption of qualified immunity, “a plaintiff must show that: (1) the public official violated the plaintiff’s constitutional rights; and (2) these rights were clearly established at the time of the

Oklahoma Ex Rel. Derryberry v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

494 F. Supp. 636 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jun 4, 1980

New gas qualifies for special incentive prices. Gas produced from new wells within these limitations may also qualify if it is shown to be from a new reservoir. … The limits of judicial analysis are clearly defined in Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. U.

Clerkley v. City of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Aug 14, 2023

“Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.” Wilkins v. … And Holcomb moves for summary judgment asserting the defense of qualified immunity. Holcomb’s “assertion of qualified immunity creates a presumption that [he is] immune from suit.” Perea v.

Anthony v. City of Oklahoma City

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Aug 14, 2023

“Qualified immunity ‘protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.” Id. … Qualified Immunity a.

Cowboy Book, Ltd. v. Board of Regents for Agriculture & Mechanical Colleges ex rel. Oklahoma State University of Agriculture & Applied Science

728 F. Supp. 1518 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 3, 1989

. § 1 et seq. 1 The Defendant asserts two jurisdictional defenses: 1) immunity from the antitrust laws under the state action exemption, and 2) sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment. … On the other hand, actions of state agencies which are actively supervised 4 and which embody a clearly and affirmatively expressed state policy 5 rise to the level of immunity under the state action exemption.

Hiler v. Bryant

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 12, 2020

, and summary judgment be granted to defendants based on qualified immunity as to plaintiff’s individual capacity claims seeking monetary relief. … As he noted, the case law cited by plaintiff does not serve to clearly establish the law in the particular circumstances involved here.

Mojsilovic v. Oklahoma ex rel. Board of Regents for the University of Oklahoma

101 F. Supp. 3d 1137 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Apr 3, 2015

The Court disagrees with Plaintiffs’ contention that Congressional intent need not be clearly stated in order to overcome the States’ sovereign immunity because the TVPRA was enacted by Congress pursuant to its authority … Whereas Congress amended Title VII in 1972 specifically to establish state liability for violations of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, see 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(a), (f); Fitzpatrick v.

Johnson v. Oklahoma Department of Veterans Affairs

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Mar 19, 2021

Defendants have asserted the defense of qualified immunity, which shields government officials from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … In response to the defense of qualified immunity, Plaintiff must show: (1) that the particular defendant's actions violated a federal constitutional or statutory right, and, if so, (2) that the right was clearly established

Weedn v. Johnson

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 4, 2024

“[I]f the plaintiff fails to establish either prong of the two-pronged qualified-immunity standard, the defendant prevails on the defense.” A.M. v. … Because Weedn failed to satisfy the first prong of the qualified immunity inquiry, the Court need not reach whether Weedn’s right was clearly established. As such, Sheriff Johnson is entitled to qualified immunity.

Wright v. Kay County Justice Facilities Authority

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 24, 2020

Defendant Ware also asserts the claim against him should be dismissed as he is entitled to qualified immunity. Defendant’s request for dismissal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. … As for Defendant Ware’s claim of qualified immunity, he does not assert that the right allegedly violated was not clearly established.

Patterson v. Cohlmia

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Sep 23, 2020

Qualified immunity protects government officials, in their individual capacities, from liability for civil damages if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Once a defendant invokes a qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff must show that the defendant violated a statutory or constitutional right, and that the right was clearly established.

Betchan v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 30, 2020

Defendants, in turn, argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on the claim, as conduct commensurate with a HIPAA violation does not violate clearly established constitutional rights. … 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

Parker v. Lawton City of

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 28, 2025

at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.” … that the right was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s unlawful conduct.”

Rudman v. Oklahoma State of

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Apr 26, 2023

discerning clearly established law. … The court dismissed the claims under the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis.