Case law

Pulliam v. Fort Bend County, Texas

District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 5, 2024

“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.” Cass v. … The second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry “asks whether the right in question was clearly established at the time of the violation.” Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650, 656 (2014) (quotation omitted).

Morris v. Tanner

District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 26, 2022

Qualified Immunity “In determining qualified immunity, courts engage in a two-step analysis. First, they asses whether a statutory or constitutional right would have been violated on the facts alleged. … When analyzing an excessive force claim, the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis “is better understood as two separate inquiries: whether the allegedly violated constitutional rights were clearly established

Broyles v. Texas

618 F. Supp. 2d 661 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 31, 2009

Due Process and Privilege and Immunities The plaintiffs’ due process and privileges and immunities challenges to § 7.006 also fail. Due process applies “when a person has a legitimate claim of entitlement to a benefit.” … Its “sole purpose” is to “declare to the several States, that whatever those rights, as you grant or establish them to your own citizens, or as you limit or qualify, or impose restrictions on their exercise, the same, neither

Davis v. Isabell

District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 26, 2023

“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials . . . from damages actions unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” Elder v. … At this juncture, Isbell and Lovell have not established that they are entitled to qualified immunity. IV.

Rivera v. City of Pasadena, Texas

District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 16, 2021

Once a defendant has asserted qualified immunity, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant “(1) ‘violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged … While it is clearly established that arrestees have a “constitutional right to be free from excessive force during an investigatory stop or arrest,” this does not end the qualified immunity inquiry. Shumpert v.

Pension Advisory Group, Ltd. v. COUNTRY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

771 F. Supp. 2d 680 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 11, 2011

The '899 Application disclosed and claimed development of a product designed to provide “disability insurance to participants in certain tax-qualified retirement plans.” … Quasi-Judicial Proceeding Immunity Defendants also contend that they are immune with respect to any statements made in a USPTO proceeding, due to quasi-judicial proceeding immunity. (D.E. 39 at 7-10.)

Silvas v. Lt. Hinajosa

District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 17, 2021

“Qualified immunity attaches 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. … official’s conduct violated clearly established law.

Destec Energy, Inc. v. Southern California Gas Co.

5 F. Supp. 2d 433 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 2, 1998

The cases decided since Parker 8 clarify that state action immunity is in the nature of an affirmative defense; the party claiming immunity has the burden of proof. Ticor II, 112 S.Ct. at 2172 ; Town of Hallie v. … This argument is limited to the court’s application of the first of the two prongs of the Midcal test for state action immunity, that “the challenged restraint must be ‘one clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed

Nash v. Gondek

District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 3, 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. … Qualified Immunity To negate qualified immunity, Nash must show the defendant violated his constitutional rights, and that the right was clearly established at the time of the

Martin v. Petty

District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 19, 2023

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … The question under the second qualified-immunity prong is whether it was clearly established, such that any reasonable officer would know, that it would be illegal to shoot Martin under the circumstances.

Scott v. City of Houston

613 F. Supp. 34 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 2, 1985

protected class; (2) that they were qualified for a particular position; (3) that despite their qualifications they were not promoted; and (4) a non-minority was promoted... … U.S.C. § 1983 (1979) provides, in relevant part that: Every person who, under color of any statute ... of any State ... subjects ... any citizen of the United States ... to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

Borden v. Fort Bend County

District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 27, 2019

The official may assert qualified immunity, which “shields government officials acting within their discretionary authority from liability when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … of qualified immunity.

Young v. City Of College Station

District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 8, 2021

Qualified immunity shields officers from liability unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Pearson v. … the unlawfulness of his conduct was clearly established at the time.

Vardeman v. City Of Houston

District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 29, 2021

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability when they are acting within their discretionary authority and their conduct does not violate clearly … Even if the government official’s conduct violates a clearly established right, the official is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity if his or her conduct was objectively reasonable. Hernandez ex rel.

Evans v. Lindley

District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 5, 2020

Qualified immunity applies unless the public official (1) violated a statutory or constitutional right (2) that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct. See Angulo v. … “Once an official pleads [qualified immunity], the burden . . . shifts to the plaintiff, who must rebut the defense by establishing a genuine fact issue as to whether the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly

Rogan v. Lewis

975 F. Supp. 956 · District Court, S.D. Texas · May 15, 1997

Even if Plaintiff stated a cause of action against Lewis and Tasma for violating her right to due process, these defendants would be shielded from Plaintiff’s federal due process claim under the doctrine of qualified immunity … Under this doctrine, public officials acting within the scope of their official duties are shielded from civil liability as long as their conduct does not violate a plaintiff's clearly established constitutional right.

Irby v. Hinkle

District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 5, 2020

unless the state has waived its immunity or Congress has clearly abrogated that immunity. … Hinkle has invoked qualified immunity, a defense that “protects government officials from liability for civil damages to the extent that their conduct is objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law.”

Salinas v. Ramos

District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 6, 2023

Qualified immunity protects officers if their alleged act did not violate a clearly established constitutional right. Sanchez, 139 F.3d at 466. … The right at issue was clearly established at the time of Plaintiff’s confinement. Therefore, Sergeant Ramos and Mr. Macias are not entitled to qualified immunity at this time. Their motion to dismiss (Dkt.

Goldman v. Williams

101 F. Supp. 3d 620 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 1, 2015

Government officials have qualified immunity from Section 1983 “liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … clearly established law and the information the officer possessed.”

Cano v. Faust

District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 31, 2022

Qualified Immunity The UTMB Defendants claim entitlement to qualified immunity as to plaintiff's claims against them. … To defeat Faust’s entitlement to qualified immunity, plaintiff must show that: (a) the law was clearly established at the time; and (b) all reasonable medical providers in Faust’s position would have known that her