Case law

Briggs v. Oklahoma Ex Rel. Oklahoma Department of Human Services

472 F. Supp. 2d 1294 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 31, 2007

in light of clearly established law.” … Thus, Bonner is not entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.

Soderstrand v. OKLAHOMA, EX REL. BD. OF REGENTS

463 F. Supp. 2d 1308 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 22, 2006

Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … right was clearly established when the alleged violation occurred.

Paden v. Board of County Commissioners

846 F. Supp. 2d 1217 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 9, 2012

Qualified Immunity Keeling asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity as to plaintiffs § 1983 claims. … Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 , 129 S.Ct. 808 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009).

Smith v. Walsh

833 F. Supp. 844 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Sep 29, 1993

Claims of qualified immunity are evaluated against an objective test. … Finally, in cases where reasonable mistakes in judgment are made that may violate established rights, qualified immunity will still protect law enforcement officials from liability.

Feldman v. Pioneer Petroleum, Inc.

87 F.R.D. 86 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jun 9, 1980

immunity from discovery under the work product doctrine. … Thus, in order for material to come within the qualified immunity from discovery created by Rule 26(b)(3), the material must be: (1) “documents and tangible things;” (2) “prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial

Scott ex rel. B.P. v. Mid-Del Schools Board of Education

229 F. Supp. 3d 1254 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 17, 2017

immunity, the plaintiff has the heavy burden of establishing: (1) that the defendant’s actions violated a federal constitutional or statutory right; and (2) that the right violated was clearly established at the time of … that McGuire is not entitled to qualified immunity.

Palmer v. BD. OF COM'RS FOR PAYNE COUNTY OKLAHOMA

765 F. Supp. 2d 1289 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 18, 2011

And, because Plaintiff has not established that Defendant Hall violated Plaintiffs clearly established constitutional rights within the two-year statutory period, Defendant Hall is entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs … Defendant Myers is not entitled to qualified immunity.

Dopp v. Honaker

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2019

insufficient to establish a constitutional violation.”). … Mata, 427 F.3d at 761 (granting qualified immunity where “[n]o reasonable jury could conclude” that the prison nurse acted with deliberate indifference to the prisoner’s medical needs).

Shauf v. Rios

313 F. Supp. 3d 1262 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Mar 2, 2018

To overcome this immunity, Plaintiff "must establish (1) that the defendant violated a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) that this right was clearly established at the time of the defendant's conduct." Dodds v. … With regard to Williams's alleged deliberate indifference, Plaintiff also defeats qualified immunity.

Bearden v. Oklahoma ex rel. Board of Regents

234 F. Supp. 3d 1148 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 10, 2017

In support of its position that plaintiff has failed to plead facts sufficient to establish a violation of the Rehab Act or Title II of the ADA, the University cites McGuinness v. … Because “[disability discrimination has clearly been identified in the context of public education,” Bowers v.

Briggs v. Oklahoma ex rel. Oklahoma Department of Human Services

472 F. Supp. 2d 1304 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 31, 2007

“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials ... from damages actions unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” Elder v. … Thus, these defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Adams v. Bouchard

591 F. Supp. 2d 1191 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 4, 2008

Qualiñed Immunity Defendants have also moved for summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity is “an entitlement not to stand trial or face the other burdens of litigation” if the complained of behavior did not violate clearly established law. Mitchell v.

Langford v. GRADY COUNTY DETENTION CENTER

670 F. Supp. 2d 1213 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 17, 2009

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 would have known … In raising the qualified immunity defense, Defendants do not contend qualified immunity should be granted on grounds of lack of clearly established federal law.

Draper v. Walsh

790 F. Supp. 1553 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 17, 1991

ANALYSIS Walsh moves for summary judgment based on a qualified immunity defense. See Snell v. … Runner, 854 F.2d 374, 377 (10th Cir.1988) (discussing standard for granting summary judgment based on qualified immunity).

Bryson v. MacY

611 F. Supp. 2d 1234 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Apr 30, 2009

When a defendant asserts qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right and (2) the constitutional right was clearly established … She also asserts that she did not violate a clearly established law in effect at the time of the alleged violation.

Trant v. Oklahoma

874 F. Supp. 2d 1294 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Mar 19, 2012

Defendant Balzer has not satisfied her burden of establishing that this immunity is presently justified. … equivalent, Defendant Balzer’s Motion for Dismissal of Plaintiffs federal and state constitutional claims on the basis of qualified immunity is not presently warranted: It was clearly established that the First Amendment

Scott v. City of Minco

393 F. Supp. 2d 1180 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · May 25, 2005

Although Defendants make an argument under the heading “qualified immunity,” they do not make a qualified immunity claim. … It is not a part of the qualified immunity inquiry. See, e.g., Wulf, 883 F.2d at 864 (first determining whether the sheriff could be personally liable before proceeding into a qualified immunity analysis).

Howard v. Oklahoma Department of Corrections

247 F. Supp. 3d 1210 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Mar 20, 2017

ADAAA Discrimination and Retaliation Alternatively, Defendants contend they are entitled to summary judgment on Howard’s ADAAA claim because he is not a “qualified individual” with a disability and has not established a prima … Thus, to establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the ADAAA, a plaintiff must show that (1) he is disabled as defined under the ADAAA; (2) he is qualified, with or without reasonable accommodation by the employer

Hutchins

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 7, 2025

The qualified immunity defense “attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Kisela v. … Additionally, once again, Plaintiff has not identified any clearly established law that is pertinent to the facts of this case. Defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity. C.

Reininger v. Oklahoma

292 F. Supp. 3d 1254 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 9, 2017

It is established that "persons with disabilities do not compose a suspect class." Id. at 1123 ; see City of Cleburne v. … II validly abrogates state sovereign immunity."