Case law

Zayas v. Boyett

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 24, 2021

Because qualified immunity is an 12 13 immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability, this question should be resolved at the 14 … the 17 right at issue was “clearly established” at the time of a defendant's alleged misconduct.

Sloan Shipyards Corp. v. United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corp.

268 F. 624 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 4, 1920

Emergency Fleet Corporation, which by the act shall be considered a “government establishment for the purposes of this section.” … Ed. 231 ): “It is undoubtedly true that the District of Columbia is a separate political community in a certain sense, and in that sense may bo called a state; but the sovereign power of-this qualified state is not lodged

Estate of Domingo v. Republic of the Philippines

694 F. Supp. 782 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 29, 1988

The Ninth Circuit in In Re Nucorp Energy Securities Litigation, 772 F.2d 1486 (9th Cir.1985) established the following test to determine whether pendant jurisdiction exists: Pendant jurisdiction exists where there is a sufficiently … Retention of plaintiffs’ state law claims clearly promotes the values of judicial economy, convenience, and fairness.

Baer v. Abel

637 F. Supp. 347 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 21, 1986

In opposition, plaintiffs contend that Congress waived FSLIC’s sovereign immunity when it allowed FSLIC to sue or be sued, 12 U.S.C. § 1725 , and concurrently established federal court jurisdiction over actions to which FSLIC … However, this case clearly falls within the rationale of Fahey v.

Langfitt v. Pierce County

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

Edwards argues that, even if he 20 did violate Langfitt’s constitutional rights, he is entitled to qualified immunity because it 21 was not clearly established that his conduct in the particular circumstances he faced … 10 “whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time of defendant’s alleged 11 misconduct.”

Joseph v. Amazon.com, Inc.

46 F. Supp. 3d 1095 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 28, 2014

In sum, the Court concludes that Amazon is entitled to § 230 immunity for Plaintiffs “libel/defamation/slander/trade libel” claim. E. … Joseph has been paid for all qualifying purchases under the Associates program, including $2,678.45 in advertising fees for 1,971 qualifying purchases. (Id. at ¶ 8.) Amazon is entitled to summary judgment on this claim.

Young v. Pena

District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 19, 2019

to qualified immunity and the 10 merits of the Fourth Amendment claim persuasive. … Given this clearly established rule, it necessarily follows that it is clearly 17 established that officers violate the Fourth Amendment if they lift clothing to conduct a 18 search in the absence of reasonable suspicion

Woodyer v. United States

334 F. Supp. 2d 1263 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 17, 2004

Petty Officers Wallsinger and Doris were both experienced and capable Coast Guard Coxswains, fully qualified to command their respective vessels. … The PVA provides a limited waiver of the United States’ sovereign immunity from suit for certain maritime claims.

Githinji v. Olympia Police Department

District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 20, 2024

Qualified Immunity 13 Defendants move for qualified immunity on all of Plaintiffs’ claims. … The qualified immunity analysis consists of two 22 prongs: (1) whether the facts the plaintiff alleges make out a violation of a constitutional right; 23 and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time

Johnson v. Kariko

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 2, 2022

They argue that Johnson failed to meet his burden of demonstrating that the 13 constitutional violations he claims are clearly established. 14 Under the qualified immunity doctrine, “government officials … cites a case clearly establishing that the conduct at issue here was 11 unconstitutional. 12 The Court agrees that each defendant is entitled to qualified

Immelt v. State of Washington Department of Licensing Real Estate Appraiser Program

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 7, 2022

Immelt has not established that 14 the WAC regime supporting that decision was unconstitutional, and she has not 15 addressed or demonstrated that defendants’ the decision violated “clearly established” 16 constitutional … Sharp and McCowan are entitled to qualified 19 immunity on any damages claim Immelt asserts against them personally.

Mills v. Zeichner

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 17, 2024

Qualified immunity “protects government officials 10 from liability for civil damages unless their conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory 11 or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Mills was allegedly deprived was 7 not so “clearly established” as to defeat qualified immunity. Indeed, Mr.

United States v. Washington

909 F. Supp. 787 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 18, 1995

Lewis recognized that: “Those qualified to act as commissioners in a particular area are likely to have had prior association with those qualified as expert witnesses from that area.” … The Shi.Ay presumption “holds that any pre statehood grant of property does not include tidelands unless the grant clearly indicated that tidelands were included.” Washington, 873 F.Supp at 1443.

Snell v. State of Washington

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 8, 2023

And even 16 if Plaintiff were correct that she spoke on a matter of public concern, qualified immunity would 17 preclude her § 1983 claims. 18 As the Court explained … established’ to preclude qualified immunity under Harlow 22 and its progeny.”

Choi v. City of Lakewood

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 4, 2022

Officer Butts also asserts 14 qualified immunity. 15 2. Clearly Established? … 16 For purposes of qualified immunity, “[a] right is clearly established when it is sufficiently 17 clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that 18 right.”

Jenkins v. Washington

46 F. Supp. 3d 1110 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 29, 2014

Unlike traditional gambling establishments, Beteha gave losing bettors the option of not paying their debts. (Id. at 4.) … Plaintiff relies upon In re Lazar, 237 F.3d 967 (9th Cir.2001), in which the Ninth Circuit discussed the extent to which a state waives its immunity by filing a proof of claim in a bankruptcy action, as established in Gardner

Bell v. City of Lacey

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 18, 2020

22 immunity because it was not (and is not) clearly established that the JSA violated the 23 Constitution. … A two-part test resolves claims of qualified immunity by determining whether plaintiffs 17 have alleged facts that “make out a violation of a constitutional right,” and if so, whether the 18 “right at issue was ‘clearly

Buck v. Case

24 F. Supp. 541 · District Court, W.D. Washington · May 9, 1938

impairs the obligation of contract, destroys the rights of complainants in their copyrighted works, nullifies valid contracts theretofore entered into, interferes with the Federal judicial power, destroys the privileges and immunities … to have knowledge concerning the extent of their ownership, there can be no presumption that they are qualified to express an opinion concerning the cost of complying with the requirements of Section 4 of the Act, nor would

US West Communications, Inc. v. TCG SEATTLE

971 F. Supp. 1365 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 24, 1997

Drawing on principles of sovereign immunity, the Supreme Court has construed the Amendment “to establish that an unconsenting State is immune from suits brought in federal courts by her own citizens as well as by citizens … “A state will be deemed to have waived its sovereign immunity when (1) the state expressly consents to suit; (2) a state statute or constitution so provides; or (3) Congress clearly intended to condition the state’s participation

Joyce v. Pierce County

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 30, 2021

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY 2 Defendants in a § 1983 action are entitled to qualified immunity from damages for civil 3 liability if their conduct does not violate clearly … In analyzing the clearly 8 established prong of qualified immunity, the court emphasized that an officer “is not entitled to 9 qualified immunity based on his claimed fear for the safety of others . . .