Case law

Bertram v. Briggs

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 20, 2021

“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 … A qualified immunity determination involves a two-pronged inquiry: (1) whether a constitutional or federal right has been violated, and (2) whether that right was “clearly established.” Saucier v.

Hill v. Rivello

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 2024

A qualified immunity determination involves a two-pronged inquiry: (1) whether a constitutional or federal right has been violated; and (2) whether that right was “clearly established.” Saucier v. … “Even if none exists, it may be possible that a ‘robust consensus of cases of persuasive authority’ in the Court of Appeals could clearly establish a right for purposes of qualified immunity.” /d. (quoting Taylor v.

Wolf

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2026

a “clearly established” right. … Wolf fails to state a claim of a violation of clearly established law. Defendants enjoy qualified immunity and should be dismissed from this action. See (Doc. No. 20 at 11–12).

Petrucci

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 25, 2026

precedent” and thus, they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Moving Defendants now argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because Johnson cannot prove that “a manual body cavity search incident to a felony arrest is prohibited by clearly established Supreme Court or Third

Krick v. Carter

477 F. Supp. 152 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 27, 1979

We have no hesitancy, therefore, in concluding that we must apply the choice of law principles established by the courts of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. … The McSwain decision would clearly dictate such a result, and we would be compelled to follow it. But this is not such a case and other considerations enter our deliberation.

Poteat v. Harrisburg School District

33 F. Supp. 2d 384 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 21, 1999

In any event, even if the Plaintiff had a first amendment cause of action here, the individual board members have qualified immunity. … It was not clearly established at the time that a policymaker like Poteat had a first amendment right to disagree with his superiors. See Moran, supra, 147 F.3d at 850 . C.

Velasquez v. City of Wilkes-Barre

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 2024

Qualified Immunity Next, the defendant police officers allege that they are shielded from liability based upon qualified immunity. After a careful review, the motion will be | denied on this point. … Qualified immunity shields “government officials performing discretionary | functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Ross v. Fiss

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2023

“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … In addition, the burden of establishing qualified immunity lies with the defendants. See Reedy v. Evanson, 615 F.3d 197, 223 (3d Cir. 2010).

Walston v. Pike County Correctional Facility

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 5, 2023

“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 … A qualified immunity determination involves a two-pronged inquiry: (1) whether a constitutional or federal right has been violated; and (2) whether that right was “clearly established.” Saucier v.

Luntz v. Hileman

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 2023

“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 … A qualified immunity determination involves a two-pronged inquiry: (1) whether a constitutional or federal right has been violated; and (2) whether that right was “clearly established.” Saucier v.

Timmons

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 12, 2026

A qualified immunity determination involves a two-pronged inquiry: (1) whether a constitutional or federal right has been violated, and (2) whether that right was “clearly established.” See Pearson, 556 U.S. at 232. … A right is clearly established for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis if established Supreme Court or Third Circuit precedent “would have put government officials on fair notice that their conduct violated the

Landis v. Ebbert

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2020

“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 … A qualified immunity determination involves a two-pronged inquiry: (1) whether a constitutional or federal right has been violated; and (2) whether that right was “clearly established.” Saucier v.

Bell v. Lackawanna County

892 F. Supp. 2d 647 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 31, 2012

Legislative Immunity Defendants Washo and O’Brien also move for summary judgment against Kovaleski, Romanini and Propersi on grounds of absolute legislative immunity. 41 Legislative immunity protects local legislators from … It is procedurally legislative if it is undertaken ‘by means of established legislative procedures.’ ” Id. (internal citations omitted). Administrative or executive acts are not entitled to immunity. Carver v.

Baum v. United States

541 F. Supp. 1349 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 29, 1982

. §§ 1346 (b) & 2671, et seq., and the National Swine Flu Immunization Program Act, 42 U.S.C. § 247b. … We have previously examined the evidence Plaintiff presented to establish the first appear anee of symptoms as sometime in November and found it wanting.

Picarella v. Terrizzi

893 F. Supp. 1292 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 14, 1995

Defendants move to dismiss the amended complaint based on qualified immunity for the individual defendants, and failure to allege a practice, policy or custom by which liability may be imposed upon the School District. … Rather, they argue that they cannot be held liable, the individual defendants because of qualified immunity and the school district because no policy, practice or custom is alleged sufficiently. See Leatherman v.

Barnello v. Pocono Mountain Regional Police Commission

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 2024

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing | discretionary functions “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly | established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … | Accordingly, to avoid a determination that qualified immunity applies, it must have been clearly established that an officer would not have probable cause to charge plaintiff with DUI, driving at an unsafe

Spotz v. Wetzel

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 18, 2024

Courts consider two prongs when determining whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity: “(1) whether the official violated a constitutional right; and (2) whether the right was clearly established.” … Without a clearly established right, Wetzel is entitled qualified immunity on Spotz’s Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim, and the Report will be adopted.

Larsen v. SENATE OF THE COM. OF PENNSYLVANIA

955 F. Supp. 1549 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 28, 1997

immunity. … Furthermore, the AO and Defendants Sobolevitch and Frankforter's arguments in support of qualified immunity are limited to the same arguments they assert in support of the outright dismissal of Larsen’s claims.

Tobin v. Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 4, 2022

DEFENDANTS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY. … If the right violated was “clearly established,” then the official is not entitled to immunity.

Gelbutis v. Shenandoah Police Department

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 23, 2019

Qualified immunity provides not merely a “defense to liability,” but rather “immunity from suit.” Hunter v. Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 227 (1991). … was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”