Case law

Shah v. University of Texas Southwestern Medical School

129 F. Supp. 3d 480 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 11, 2015

Southwestern’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss Shah’s Rehabilitation Act claim; *489 granted the individual defendants’ motions to dismiss Shah’s § 1983 claims based on qualified immunity; granted the individual defendants … IV Defendants do not move to dismiss this action based on sovereign immunity.

Gonzales v. Hunt County Sheriffs Department

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 8, 2021

Also, to defeat Defendant Meeks’ qualified immunity defense at this stage, Plaintiff “must plausibly allege a violation of a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the purported violation.” … See Morgan, 969 F.3d at 245 (plaintiff “must plausibly allege a violation of a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time” to defeat defendant’s entitlement to qualified immunity).

Niter v. Brown

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 25, 2024

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established statutory or constitutional right.” Edmiston v. … The Court finds that Brown is entitled to qualified immunity. Plaintiffs do not plausibly allege either element needed to overcome qualified immunity.

Crane v. State of Tex.

534 F. Supp. 1237 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 11, 1982

shall be elected and qualified. … Establish, repair and exercise general control over contract to sell roads, highways, bridges, ferries, and airports and to subterranean waters; 3.

Cornett v. Ward

District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 25, 2020

(2) Qualified Immunity Furthermore, the Court denies Ward’s Motion as to the excessive force claim on qualified immunity grounds. … When considering whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, the Court “must ask whether the law so clearly and unambiguously prohibited his conduct that ‘every reasonable official would understand that what

Lopez v. City of Dallas

696 F. Supp. 240 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 6, 1988

City of Dallas’ Entitlement to Immunity Plaintiff urges the Court to deny Defendants’ motion regarding immunity. … The Court is of the opinion that police officers, exercising their authority under a search warrant, are performing a governmental function. 6 It is well established that municipalities are immune from tort liability in carrying

Velasquez v. Rogers

District Court, N.D. Texas · May 26, 2021

The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials sued under section 1983 “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … (emphasis added) 3 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 v.

Schrader v. Texas Department of Public Safety

District Court, N.D. Texas · Nov 23, 2020

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 the plaintiff has alleged any violation of a clearly established right, and if so, whether

Mendez

District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 20, 2026

Qualified Immunity “A qualified immunity defense alters the usual summary judgment burden of proof.” Brown v. Callahan, 623 F.3d 249, 253 (5th Cir. 2010). … To overcome an official’s qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must establish: “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the

Portalatin v. Cavalie

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 27, 2025

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory … ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”

OKC Corp. v. Williams

489 F. Supp. 576 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 27, 1980

Economou, 438 U.S. 478 , 98 S.Ct. 2894 , 57 L.Ed.2d 895 (1978), the Supreme Court set forth a qualified immunity for executive branch officials acting in the scope of their official duties. … The court decides only that immunity is present even if qualified. 6 . The only possible such regulations are 17 C.F.R. §§ 200.80 (b)(4), (5), and (7).

Jones v. LaHood

667 F. Supp. 2d 714 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Oct 27, 2009

As discussed supra, the Aviation Act designates to the Administrator of the FAA the authority to issue DER certifications to qualified individuals, as determined by the FAA’s established application and evaluation process … White, 548 U.S. 53, 68 , 126 S.Ct. 2405 , 165 L.Ed.2d 345 (2006)(Title VII anti-retaliation provision not intended to immunize employee from "petty slights” or "minor annoyances” in the workplace).

Jenkins v. First Nat. Bank

26 F. Supp. 312 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 8, 1989

General principles of other jurisdictions may not control, however well established, if the law of the situs is different. 65 C.J. 334; Erie Railroad Co. v. … If it is patent in a case that the tendency is absent because of the person’s immunity from such desire, then the assumption fails.

Crane v. City of Arlington Texas

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 16, 2020

Qualified Immunity “Because qualified immunity is an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability,” it is important to resolve “immunity questions at the … “First, we must determine whether the plaintiff has made a sufficient showing that the official violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right.” Id.

Castillo

District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 3, 2026

iii.Individual Liability Claim (against Rodges and Mendoza) The Motion to Dismiss also alleges that qualified immunity bars Castillo’s Equal Protection claims against Rodges and Mendoza. … unreasonable in light of clearly established law at the time of the incident.59 “Therefore, unless existing precedent squarely governs the conduct at issue, an official will be entitled to qualified immunity.”60 “The

Hodges v. University of Texas Southwestern Medical School

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 29, 2023

Qualified immunity shields a public official but only “‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” Roque v. … For these reasons, Plaintiff fails to meet her burden to show qualified immunity does not apply and, therefore, the Individual Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Smith v. Carvajal

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 1, 2021

Zook is entitled to qualified immunity. … In order to overcome the presumption of qualified immunity, Smith has the burden of showing (1) Zook “violated [Smith’s] constitutional right” and (2) “the violated right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the alleged

Nobby Lobby, Inc. v. City of Dallas

767 F. Supp. 801 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 24, 1991

Prior to the hearing, Defendant Bardin’s motion to dismiss on the ground of qualified immunity was granted and the complaint against him in his individual capacity was dismissed. … Indeed, as noted above, Officer Bardin was granted qualified immunity from this suit in part because he received official assurance from the District Attorney that the seizures were legally proper.

B S v. Waxahachie Independent School District

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 23, 2020

Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability in their individual capacity to the extent that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. Garcia v. … the circumstances was a clearly established right.

State v. United States

336 F. Supp. 3d 664 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 21, 2018

The following excerpt from the statutory text shows that Congress clearly intended the HIPF to be a "fee": Sec. 9010. [ 26 U.S.C. 4001 note prec.] … Where the law provides no remedy, courts are "clearly authorize[d] ... to decree restitution in order to give effect to the policy of Congress." Porter , 328 U.S. at 400 , 66 S.Ct. 1086 .