Case law

Pavlov v. Parsons

574 F. Supp. 393 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 14, 1983

and qualified immunity from the constitutional tort claims. … Once the defendant establishes this defense, the burden then shifts to the plaintiff to prove that the defendants’ action violated clearly established law. Harlow v.

Keeble v. Cisneros

664 F. Supp. 1076 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 15, 1987

Against this statutory and factual background, the various individual Defendants claim absolute and qualified immunity. … A qualified immunity protects a public official from liability unless his conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Harvey v. Montgomery County

881 F. Supp. 2d 785 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 30, 2012

“Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from civil liability ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … The Deputies’ actions were simply not objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law. Therefore, the Deputies are entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs deliberate indifference to medical care claim.

McDonald v. City of Freeport, Tex.

834 F. Supp. 921 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 5, 1993

To be entitled to qualified immunity, a governmental official must have been performing discretionary functions, and his conduct must not have violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … established law for purposes of qualified immunity inquiries.

Groom v. Fickes

966 F. Supp. 1466 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 2, 1997

Qualified Immunity The plaintiff also contends that, in an investigative capacity, Clark is entitled only to the more general qualified immunity. … Nevertheless, qualified immunity shields prosecutors and other government officials from liability for money damages when performing discretionary functions “if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

Maldonado v. Rodriguez

322 F. Supp. 3d 753 · District Court, S.D. Texas · May 15, 2017

immunity. … Qualified Immunity from Individual Capacity Claims a.

Mossey v. City of Galveston, Tex.

94 F. Supp. 2d 793 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 25, 2000

Plaintiff’s Claim of Unlawful Arrest Is Barred by Qualified Immunity An individual has a clearly established right to be free from unlawful arrest. See Duckett v. City of Cedar Park, 950 F.2d 272, 278 (5th Cir.1992). … Plaintiff’s Claim of Excessive Force Is Not Barred by Qualified Immunity Established law clearly provides that Plaintiff has a Fourteenth Amendment right to be free from the use of excessive force by police.

Hobart v. City of Stafford

784 F. Supp. 2d 732 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 29, 2011

Officials sued in their individual capacities are protected by qualified immunity unless the act violates a constitutional right clearly established at the time. Sanchez v. Swyden, 139 F.3d 464, 466-467 (5th Cir.1998). … To determine whether the plaintiff has overcome the presumption of qualified immunity, the Court first considers whether the plaintiff has proven a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Collins v.

Duncan v. Goedeke and Cleasey

837 F. Supp. 846 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 22, 1993

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, federal officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … In order to overcome a defendant official's qualified immunity from Bivens suits, a plaintiff claiming violation of constitutional rights must first show that these rights were clearly established at the time of the conduct

United States ex rel. Parikh v. Citizens Medical Center

977 F. Supp. 2d 654 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 20, 2013

If that defense applies to FCA claims, they would have an immunity “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … The qualified immunity standard reflects the defense’s typical application to these cases asserting individual rights: the defense is available for officials “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Duncan v. Goedeke & Cleasey

837 F. Supp. 846 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 22, 1993

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, federal officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … In order to overcome a defendant official’s qualified immunity from Bivens suits, a plaintiff claiming violation of constitutional rights must first show that these rights were clearly established at the time of the conduct

Thomas v. City of Galveston, Texas

800 F. Supp. 2d 826 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 1, 2011

To determine whether the plaintiff has overcome the presumption of qualified immunity, the Court first considers whether the plaintiff has proven a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Collins v. … Defendants’ argument for qualified immunity also fails. First, “[t]he right to be free from arrest without probable cause is a clearly established constitutional right.” Mangieri v.

Jolly v. Klein

923 F. Supp. 931 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 29, 1996

Qualified Immunity Dr. Klein asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity in this case. … When determining whether qualified immunity is available, the actions of a reasonably competent official are assessed in the light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time the action was taken.

Gonzalez v. Huerta

103 F. Supp. 3d 840 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 10, 2015

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

Jackson v. Katy Independent School District

951 F. Supp. 1293 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 8, 1996

In examining an official’s claim of qualified immunity, courts follow a two-step process. The first step is to ascertain whether the plaintiff alleges “the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.” … Even if an official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right, he is entitled to qualified immunity if reasonable public officials could differ on the lawfulness of their actions. Hassan v.

Callis v. Sellars

931 F. Supp. 504 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 27, 1996

In examining an official’s claim of qualified immunity, courts follow a two-step process. The first step is to ascertain whether the plaintiff alleges “the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.” … Even if an official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right, he is entitled to qualified immunity if the conduct was objectively reasonable. Salas v. Carpenter, 980 F.2d at 310 .

Harville v. Texas A & M University

833 F. Supp. 2d 645 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 8, 2011

They assert that all three of the defendant employees are protected by qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity Additionally, the Court grants the defendants’ motion regarding Ryan, Mortensen and Maes because they are shielded by qualified immunity.

Maria S. ex rel. E.H.F. v. Doe

267 F. Supp. 3d 923 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jul 21, 2017

After identifying the clearly established rights at stake, the Court ruled as a matter .of law that a waiver of those rights obtained through coercion would not be objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law … Qualified immunity, shields 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

Rodriguez v. Cruz

296 F. Supp. 2d 726 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 6, 2003

Essentially, Cruz argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that Rodriguez’s reports involved a matter of public concern. … As discussed above, it was not clearly established that Rodriguez’s speech addressed a matter of public concern and Cruz is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. B.

Baughman v. Garcia

254 F. Supp. 3d 848 · District Court, S.D. Texas · May 26, 2017

A plaintiff seeking to overcome qualified immunity must satisfy a two-prong inquiry by showing: “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the … For purposes of qualified immunity, “[a] clearly established right is one that is sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right.” Mullenix v.