Case law

Haworth v. City of Walla Walla

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 11, 2020

ECF No. 19 at 15-18. 8 Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil damages unless 9 their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of 10 which a … “Only when an officer’s conduct violates a clearly 7 established constitutional right – when the officer should have known he was 8 violating the Constitution – does he forfeit qualified immunity.”

Blocktree Props., LLC v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 2 of Grant Cnty. Wash., Mun. Corp.

380 F. Supp. 3d 1102 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 29, 2019

The District is a municipal corporation established pursuant to Washington statutes. Wash. Rev. Code § 54.04.020 . … privilege or immunity.

Durham v. Wilke

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jul 23, 2025

“The doctrine of qualified immunity 15 protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their 16 conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of 17 which … “In determining whether an 19 officer is entitled to qualified immunity, we consider (1) whether there has been a 20 violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether that right was clearly established 1 at the

Funabiki v. County of Whitman

District Court, E.D. Washington · Oct 5, 2024

Qualified Immunity 6 The Court next assesses whether summary judgment is warranted on 7 qualified immunity grounds. … Oct. 31, 2018) 16 (finding the individual defendants entitled to qualified immunity “[s]ince there was 17 no clearly established right to proper suicide prevention protocols”); NeSmith, 18 2016 WL 4515857, at *7-8

Dormaier v. Soap Lake, City of

District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 12, 2020

A 26 right is clearly established if the right’s contours are sufficiently definite such that 27 the question confronted by the officer is beyond debate. … With regard to excessive force 5 claims, the qualified immunity analysis is fact-intensive, and police officers are 6 entitled to qualified immunity unless existing precedent squarely governs the 7 specific facts at

Akins v. Robb

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jul 30, 2020

that was clearly 18 established at the time of the challenged conduct. … immunity only by showing 9 that those rights were clearly established at the time of the conduct at issue.

Wagner v. United States

353 F. Supp. 3d 1062 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 16, 2018

Supreme Court explained: A waiver of the Federal Government's sovereign immunity must be unequivocally expressed in statutory text. … Clearly, it does not match the disallowed refund claim of $524,364. This appears to be nothing more than an arbitrary number that the United States is now seeking to use to reduce Plaintiffs' claim before this Court.

Hays

District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 19, 2026

qualified 1 immunity. … “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.”

Farris v. Culp

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

Qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long 12 as their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional 13 rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Id. at 236. 2 Plaintiff has the burden to overcome a defendant official’s qualified 3 immunity by showing that those rights were clearly established at the time of the 4 conduct at

Cree v. Waterbury

873 F. Supp. 404 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 29, 1994

On appeal, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed this court’s ruling on qualified immunity. (Ct.Rec. 80). … The Circuit held that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity since the treaty right claimed was not clearly established at the time they issued the citations.

CONFED. TRIBES AND BANDS OF YAKAMA INDIAN v. Lowry

968 F. Supp. 531 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 18, 1997

Congress clearly intended to abrogate the sovereign immunity of the States pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 2710 (d)(7)(A)(i). Id. at ___, 116 S.Ct. at 1124 . … The Washington State Lottery is clearly not Class I gaming activity under IGRA's definition.

Donelson v. Providence Health & Services

823 F. Supp. 2d 1179 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Oct 14, 2011

Chapel Hill Presbyterian Church, 156 Wash.App. 827, 848-50 , 234 P.3d 299 (2010) (rejecting Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection challenge and not reaching state Privileges and Immunities argument); Farnam, 116 Wash.2d at … Donelson’s exhibit clearly states that “Providence Health & Services— Washington/Montana Region” receives federal financial assistance; presumably, Providence Health & Services — Washington/Montana Region includes Defendant

Puki v. Okanogan County

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

was clearly established at the time of the incident.” … Langton’s status and thus 3 protected by qualified immunity as to the § 1983 claim.

Thomason v. State of Washington

District Court, E.D. Washington · Oct 30, 2024

“Will establishes that the State and arms of 12 the State, which have traditionally enjoyed Eleventh Amendment immunity, are 13 not subject to suit under § 1983 in either federal or state court.” Howlett v. … Therefore, the State of Washington is entitled to 15 Eleventh Amendment immunity and does not qualify as a “person” under Section 16 1983.

Teck Metals, Ltd. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's

735 F. Supp. 2d 1246 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Oct 22, 2010

Teck Cominco Metals, Ltd., 452 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir.2006), clearly establishes the boundaries of any actual CERCLA liability on the part of Teck. … Furthermore, the court did not clearly err in denying Defendants’ request for a Rule 56(f) continuance with regard to this particular issue. C.

Bledsoe v. Ferry County

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 23, 2020

If the court finds that the 19 constitutional right was clearly established, but that the defendant made a reasonable 20 mistake in applying the law, then the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. … Bledsoe asserts were clearly established. 9 As Ms.

McCain v. Dept of Corr

District Court, E.D. Washington · Sep 20, 2021

ECF No. 71 at 18. 6 Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil damages unless 7 their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional … “Only when an officer’s conduct violates a clearly established 19 constitutional right—when the officer should have known he was violating the 20 Constitution—does he forfeit qualified immunity.” Lacey v.

Ward v. Child Protection Services

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 6, 2020

Defendant Truscott argues she is entitled to 13 qualified immunity on these claims. … ECF No. 74 at 7. 14 “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from 15 liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly 16 established

Rolovich v. Washington State University

District Court, E.D. Washington · May 30, 2023

Qualified Immunity 7 Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil damages unless 8 their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … right; and (2) whether the right was clearly 17 established at the time of the alleged violation such that a reasonable person in the 18 defendant’s position would have understood that his actions violated that right

Thompson v. Central Valley School District No 365

District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 15, 2024

Thus, Mr. 9 Small is entitled to qualified immunity with respect to his decision to place 10 Plaintiff on administrative leave. 11 Similarly, it was not clearly established … Additionally, the 20 individual Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly 21 established under the facts of this case that transferring Plaintiff to a teaching 22 position could violate