Case law

Brooks v. Taylor County

District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 18, 2022

The officers moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity—a doctrine that shields officers unless they violated the plaintiff’s then-clearly established rights. … Qualified immunity applies “when an official’s conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” White v. Pauly, 137 S.

Tafolla v. Wacker

District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 19, 2025

“Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established statutory or constitutional right.” Edmiston v. … Clearly Established Law However, plausibly pleading that Defendant used excessive force does not alone defeat a qualified immunity defense.

Kelson v. City of Dallas

District Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 20, 2023

The “clearly establish[ed]” prong of the qualified immunity analysis “‘is better understood as two separate inquiries: [(1)] whether the allegedly violated constitutional rights were clearly established at the time of … , Kelson’s attempt to defeat qualified immunity also fails as to clearly established law.

Herod v. King

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 16, 2024

Once an officer pleads qualified immunity, the plaintiff has the burden to establish that the officer violated the plaintiff’s clearly established federal rights. Argueta, 86 F.4th at 1088 (citing Estate of Davis v. … King’s characterization of the type of “clearly established” law required to defeat J. King’s right to qualified immunity as a matter of law. As noted, Herod alleges that J.

Ellis

District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 21, 2026

An officer is entitled to qualified immunity “if there is no violation, or if the conduct did not violate law clearly established at the time.” Bailey v. Iles, No. 22-30509, 2023 WL 8062239 at *2 (5th Cir. … The Court finds the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, whether the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the violation, is also met.

Stinson v. McGinnis

District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 16, 2024

So, as explained in more detail below, for a plaintiff to overcome qualified immunity, she must also show “that the right was clearly established” – “‘[t]he relevant, dispositive inquiry in determining whether … “The reasonableness of the official’s conduct and the degree to which the particular right in question was clearly established are thus merged into one issue for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis.”

Paradise v. Wheeler

District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 12, 2024

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity “shield[s] [government officials] from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … When officers assert qualified immunity, a court employs a two- step analysis: (1) whether the official violated a statutory or constitutional right; and (2) whether the right was “clearly established” at the time

Harris v. Wayborn

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 27, 2022

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity insulates a government official from civil damages liability when the official’s actions do not “violate clearly established statutory … In analyzing whether an individual defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, the court considers whether the plaintiff has alleged any violation of a clearly established right, and if so, whether the individual defendant

De Paz Gonzalez v. Duane

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 23, 2022

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity insulates a government official from civil damages liability when the official’s actions do not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … In analyzing whether an individual defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, the court considers whether plaintiff has alleged any violation of a clearly established right, and, if so, whether

Cervantez v. Frith

District Court, N.D. Texas · May 2, 2025

Qualified immunity applies “when an official’s conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” White v. … To prevail against a qualified-immunity defense, the plaintiff must show that the right she claims was violated was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged misconduct. Batyukova v.

Pamon v. United States Postal Service

District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 6, 2025

Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985) (explaining that “[u]nless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the … Campbell argues that Plaintiff cannot overcome her qualified immunity defense because it has never been “clearly established law” that an employee on FMLA leave has a right “to be free from receiving a letter concerning

Biggers v. Massingill

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 8, 2023

When a defendant invokes qualified immunity, the burden then rests on the plaintiff to demonstrate that qualified immunity is inapplicable. … To defeat a defendant’s assertion of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show: (1) the violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) that the right in question was clearly established at the time of the alleged

Hartford Casualty Insurance v. Price

435 F. Supp. 2d 566 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 19, 2006

The Texas Constitution provides, in relevant part, that the “qualified voters of each county shall elect an assessor-collector of taxes for the county.” Tex. Const. Art. 8, Sec. 14. … Defendant argues that “a litigant’s request for declaratory relief cannot ... change the basic character of a suit” and that Plaintiff “has failed to name one statute that clearly and unambiguously waives immunity from suit

Ramirez v. City of Lake Worth TX

District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 9, 2024

When a defendant invokes qualified immunity, the burden rests on the plaintiff to demonstrate that qualified immunity is inapplicable. Ramirez, 3 F.4th at 133. … To defeat an assertion of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show: (1) the violation of a constitutional or statutory right; and (2) that the right in question was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation

Goad v. Lyde

District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 12, 2024

This second qualified immunity prong is to determine whether a defendant’s actions were objectively reasonable “in light of clearly established law at the time of the conduct in question.” Hampton Co. … Conversely, an officer’s conduct is not protected by qualified immunity if, in light of clearly established pre-existing law, it was apparent that the officer’s conduct, when undertaken, would be a violation of the right

Arzabala v. Weems

District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 8, 2024

Qualified immunity applies “when an official’s conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” White v. … Plaintiff has not demonstrated that Defendant Miller or Defendant Weems violated his clearly established constitutional rights; thus, these defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. D.

Bernabe v. Rosenbaum

District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 18, 2021

Conversely, an officer’s conduct is not protected by qualified immunity if, in light of clearly established pre-existing law, it was apparent the conduct, when undertaken, would be a violation of the right at issue. … In analyzing qualified immunity claims, the Supreme Court has “repeatedly told courts . . . to not define clearly established law at a high level of generality.” Mullenix, 577 U.S. at 12 (citation omitted).

Martin v. Bill Clements Unit Officers

District Court, N.D. Texas · Nov 12, 2024

Once an officer pleads qualified immunity, the plaintiff has the burden to establish that the officer violated the plaintiff’s clearly established federal rights. Argueta, 86 F.4th at 1088 (citing Estate of Davis v. … Martin Does Not Overcome the Second Prong of the Qualified Immunity Analysis. 1. No violation of clearly established law.

Thompson v. Texas Department of Public Safety

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 16, 2023

Qualified Immunity Trooper Strange asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials sued pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Cunningham v. United States Commissioner

165 B.R. 599 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Nov 4, 1993

The 23C Certificate must be signed and dated by a qualified assessment officer; the date on which the Certificate is signed is considered the date of the assessment. 4 . … I think we have established that the process of doing a manual certificate is repeated on a monthly basis whenever the computer is down. A: Yes.