Case law

Murray v. Supreme Court of Washington

District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 7, 2025

Thus, it is unclear if the named judges would be immune 19 from Plaintiff’s claims for damages. 20 While judges are immune to suits seeking damages, judicial immunity does not … The amended complaint 5 must include a short, plain statement clearly stating the factual allegations supporting 6 his claims and provide clarity regarding what claims she is attempting to bring in this 7 lawsuit.

Foster v. State of Washington

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 21, 2020

, “unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was 9 clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … “When [the qualified immunity] test is properly 7 applied, it protects ‘all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.’” 8 Hernandez v.

Gantt v. Rhoton

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 17, 2020

Qualified Immunity 20 If the Court interprets Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint as a complaint that 21 includes a demand for damages, then qualified immunity would … Qualified immunity would not apply if the 2 only remedy in this matter is a request for injunctive relief. 3 Qualified immunity should be assessed at the earliest possible juncture, because 4 it is an

Curtis v. Inslee

District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 27, 2024

Inslee 5 qualified immunity here is consistent with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in Johnson 6 that the Oregon governor and state officials were entitled to qualified immunity against § 1983 7 claims (including … Inslee has demonstrated that 13 he is entitled to qualified immunity on all the Plaintiffs’ § 1983 claims; there is no showing that 14 he is not entitled to qualified immunity on the Plaintiffs’ repackaged § 1983 claims

Karnoski v. Trump

328 F. Supp. 3d 1156 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 27, 2018

However, "the privilege is qualified, not absolute, and can be overcome by an adequate showing of need." Id. at 745 . … Only then can the Court evaluate whether the privilege applies and if so, whether Plaintiffs have established a showing of need sufficient to overcome it.

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

District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 28, 2022

She called Defendants’ claim of qualified immunity “equally specious” because she 3 “clearly and unmistakably” “never asserted” any claim that Sharp or McCowan were 4 personally liable for their conduct; again, she claims … These include Eleventh Amendment and qualified immunity, and the 12 argument that the regulations are not unconstitutional as a matter of law, either facially or 13 as applied to Immelt.

Bell Consumers, Inc. v. Lay

203 F. Supp. 2d 1202 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 28, 2002

In this instance, the Johnsons have not made a sufficient showing that the United States cannot establish-its claim, if the claim were raised in a proper proceeding. … The Johnsons have not shown that sovereign immunity has been waived.

Young v. Pena

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 6, 2019

immunity: Police officers 4 “generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not 5 violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person 6 … the right at issue was “clearly established” at the time the defendant engaged 10 in the misconduct.

Brinkmeyer v. Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board

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

review and that Washington’s residency requirements are 18 clearly rationally related to legitimate state interests. … Id. 3 LCB argues that Brinkmeyer does not have standing to assert his Privileges or 4 Immunities Clause claim because it protects the rights of citizens new to a state in 5 relation to established state citizens

Hernandez v. Federal Way

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 24, 2020

Federal “qualified immunity protects 5 government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate 6 clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable [ … immunity 13 because his actions had violated clearly established law in that jurisdiction.

Richey v. Stemler

District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 1, 2021

The R&R applied the two- 25 part test for qualified immunity articulated in Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201 (2001). 26 Id. … Thus, the Court must resolve the 20 issue of qualified immunity as a matter of law. 21 “For purposes of qualified immunity, we resolve all factual disputes in favor of the 22 party

Boyd v. Constantine

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 14, 2022

from suit under the doctrine of qualified immunity. 20 Mr. … immunity.

Scott v. City of Tacoma

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 5, 2025

was clearly 7 established at the time’ of the violation.” … right was clearly established at the time of 4 the incident.”

Allen

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 14, 2026

has not shown that the Court’s 12 determinations on his ADA single cell accommodation and wheelchair access claims 13 against DOC were manifest error, or that it erred in concluding that Kaehler is qualifiedly 14 immune … Allen has not cited a “robust consensus” of persuasive authority 18 clearly establishing an unqualified right to a wheelchair in the circumstances he alleges, 19 leaving Kaehler entitled to qualified immunity.

Committee for an Independent P-I v. Smith

549 F. Supp. 985 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 27, 1982

The Court held that in order to qualify as a “failing company,” a newspaper would have to have been on the brink of liquidation, would have to show that there were no alternatives to a JOA, and would have to establish that … American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233 , 56 S.Ct. 444 , 80 L.Ed. 660 (1936), relied on heavily by the plaintiffs, is clearly inapplicable.

Royalblood

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 8, 2026

It was clearly established well before September 2024 14 that a pretrial detainee could not be subjected to segregation as punishment without due 15 process. Mitchell, 75 F.3d at 523–24. … Because Ossewaarde’s entitlement to qualified 16 immunity turns on the same disputed factual question, he is not entitled to qualified 17 immunity

Malone v. Quigley

District Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 18, 2019

The fact that the Court’s dismissal of the case was reversed with such an 20 instruction is alone a significant difference between this motion for counsel and the prior three. 21 The defendants qualified immunity … A pro se Resident is not likely to be equipped 2 to articulate his claims or a response to the summary judgment motion, which will require legal 3 analysis in response to a qualified immunity argument based on the newly-altered

Taylor v. Washington Department of Corrections

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 9, 2023

21 The individual Defendants assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity defense. … For 24 1 purposes of qualified immunity, “[a] right is clearly established when it is sufficiently clear that 2 every reasonable official would

Poole v. City of Vancouver

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 9, 2025

Defendants add that Officer Block is 21 entitled to qualified immunity because there is no clearly established law holding that an officer 22 violated the Fourth Amendment under similar circumstances. … For similar reasons to the other § 1983 claims, Defendants 4 argue Officer Block is entitled to qualified immunity because there is no clearly established right 5 at issue.

Ellis v. Pierce County

District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 9, 2024

8 Redding asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly 9 established that “using a leashed K-9 to search outside for a violent uncooperating 10 suspect evading police, or the spontaneous … Viewed in Ellis’s favor, this conduct amounts to a 9 violation of a clearly established right.