Case law

Torrescano v. Goodwater

District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 8, 2022

1 Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil damages unless 2 their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of 3 which a reasonable person would have known.” … Defendant Goodwater’s dealings with Plaintiff did not violate any 15 clearly established right.

Cheesman v. Ellensburg, City of

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 2, 2020

Pearson, 555 U.S. at 236. 17 Under the qualified immunity analysis, a “clearly established right” is one 18 that is sufficiently clear that every reasonable officer would have understood that … It is not clearly 4 established that a parent has a constitutional right to obtain a second medical 5 examination, nor is it clearly established that Defendant Week should have 6 prevented CPS from taking their children

Marks v. Inslee

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jul 8, 2021

Qualified Immunity 16 Defendants argue that even if Marks stated a viable constitutional claim, 17 Defendant Uttecht is entitled to qualified immunity because the … “Because the 5 premise of qualified immunity is that state officials should not be liable for money 6 damages absent fair warning that their actions were unconstitutional, the clearly 7 established law standard ‘requires

Thompson v. Central Valley School District No 365

District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 24, 2022

Qualified Immunity 15 The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so 16 long as their conduct “‘does not violate clearly established statutory … Mullenix, 577 U.S. at 12 (quotation omitted). 1 In making the qualified immunity determination, courts are not to define 2 clearly established law at a high level of generality. Id.

Orozco v. Yakima Sheriff's Office

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 28, 2024

Defendants argue each officer is entitled to qualified 6 immunity. 7 To establish a claim under §1983, a plaintiff must establish (1) a deprivation … 17 arrest Plaintiff and hence they are entitled to qualified immunity. 18 4.

Peterson v. City of Yakima

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 23, 2022

to 6 qualified immunity. … “Only when an officer’s conduct violates a clearly 12 established constitutional right—when the officer should have known he was 13 violating the Constitution—does he forfeit qualified immunity.”

Mallon

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 18, 2026

unlawfulness of 5 their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’” … ’] conduct was clearly established at the time.”

Cheesman v. DSHS Region 1/DCFS Childrens Administration

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 27, 2021

that Defendant’s conduct did not violate a constitutional right, or (2) the right was 9 not clearly established at the time of the violation. … immunity because at the time of the 10 incident in question, it was clearly established a state official violates a parents’ 11 Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process rights when it causes medical 12 examinations

O'KEEFE v. Murphy

860 F. Supp. 748 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 8, 1994

First, they contend that they have qualified immunity from suit: because their conduct does not violate a clearly established constitutional right, O’Keefe cannot prove that no reasonable official would believe such conduct … lawful (an essential element to defeat qualified immunity).

Martin v. Fernandez

District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 7, 2023

Qualified Immunity 2 Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil damages unless 3 their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional … “Only when an officer’s conduct violates a clearly 1 established constitutional right – when the officer should have known he was 2 violating the Constitution – does he forfeit qualified immunity.”

Hickman

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 29, 2026

Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231, 129 S.Ct. 808 (2009). 4 “Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly 5 established constitutional right.” Id. at 232. Mr. … ECF No. 1 at 6. 20 Having failed to plead the violation of a clearly established right, Officers Dietrich 1 and Vargas are entitled to immunity on Mr.

Curtis v. Porter

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 16, 2020

Curtis fails to present evidence to support a viable First 15 Amendment claim and that Sergeant Porter is entitled to qualified immunity from 16 damages. … Qualified Immunity 2 Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil damages unless 3 their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional

Benjamin v. Stevens County

District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 27, 2019

Borders’s conduct 2 violated a clearly established constitutional right. Accordingly, Mr. Walsh and Ms. 3 Borders are entitled to qualified immunity, and the Court grants them summary 4 judgment on Ms. … Borders received qualified immunity and because 20 Ms.

Boyd v. Overman

District Court, E.D. Washington · Oct 16, 2024

Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the claims of deliberate 14 indifference under either the Eighth or Fourteenth Amendment as well as the First 15 Amendment claim.7 It was not clearly established in 2019 … Moreover, Defendants are entitled to Eleventh 19 Amendment immunity and qualified immunity.

Redmond v. Birrenkott

District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 20, 2019

Courts 3 evaluate claims of qualified immunity by considering (1) whether “the facts alleged 4 show the official’s conduct violated a constitutional right” and (2) whether “the right 5 was clearly established” when … A right is clearly 7 established if “a reasonable public official would know that his or her specific 8 conduct violated clearly established rights[.]” Cunningham v.

Barstad v. State of Washington

District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 9, 2022

to qualified 16 immunity. … “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from 17 liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly 18 established statutory or constitutional rights of

Townsel v. Whitney

District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 10, 2025

However, qualified immunity shields 17 government actors from civil damages unless their conduct violates “clearly 18 established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would 19 have known … Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil 5 damages unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or 6 constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Roberts v. Governor Jay Inslee

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 18, 2024

Defendant answers that he is entitled 16 to qualified immunity on these issues because Plaintiffs have not established that 17 the Proclamation violated any clearly established constitutional or statutory rights. 18 … ECF No. 36 at 55. 19 Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil damages unless 20 their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional

Altiero v. Spokane County

District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 12, 2025

Qualified immunity protects a law enforcement 23 “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly 24 established … law so as to avoid qualified immunity.

Lee v. Potter

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 8, 2020

Lee’s alleged Fourth Amendment 8 right is clearly established. Although Mr. … Lee has failed to meet his burden to show 14 that the alleged right was clearly established, and Plaintiff’s rejects Mr.