Case law

Pethtel v. West Virginia State Police

568 F. Supp. 2d 658 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jul 29, 2008

Qualified immunity is abrogated only upon a showing that the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right and that such right was clearly established at the time the conduct occurred. Id. … Furthermore, even if the plaintiff had established a constitutional injury, the supervisors are entitled to qualified immunity because, as discussed above, such injury was not clearly established at the time. E.

Pennington v. Teufel

396 F. Supp. 2d 715 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Aug 26, 2005

Because Plaintiffs have not alleged and cannot show that any of these Defendants violated any clearly established federal law, the Court agrees that the individual Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery’ ”) (quoting Mitchell v.

Finley v. Trent

955 F. Supp. 642 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Feb 28, 1997

The Court finds that the right to prompt medical attention for a serious medical need was clearly established in 1994. … Summary judgment based upon qualified immunity is inappropriate “where what actually happened ... need[s] to be resolved by the trier of fact in order to reach a decision on the applicability of qualified immunity.”

Bosley v. Lemmon

656 F. Supp. 2d 582 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Aug 31, 2009

Federal Qualified Immunity Standard Qualified immunity shields government officials “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … so, whether that constitu *592 tional right is clearly established.

Jones v. Price

696 F. Supp. 2d 618 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Mar 17, 2010

Qualified Immunity Price also has argued that good faith qualified immunity shields him from liability in this action because his conduct did not violate a clearly established right held by Jones. … Here, Price has failed to establish that he is shielded by qualified immunity.

Arbaugh v. BOARD OF EDUC., COUNTY OF PENDLETON

329 F. Supp. 2d 762 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Aug 6, 2004

Qualified Immunity Thompson asserts the defense of qualified immunity in his reply. … This immunity is available when the conduct of a government employee does not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known. Harlow v.

Walker v. Tyler County Commission

886 F. Supp. 540 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · May 22, 1995

An executive official is entitled to qualified immunity where an objective observer could find that the officer reasonably believed that his conduct did not violate clearly established constitutional rights. See e.g. … any clearly established constitutional rights of the plaintiff.

Rankin v. Berkeley County Sheriff's Department

222 F. Supp. 2d 802 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Sep 19, 2002

Even though a prosecutor has absolute immunity for a decision not to prosecute, qualified immunity exists for a decision not to investigate. 14 In this matter, Games-Neely has qualified immunity for not investigating the … The Court, therefore, finds that plaintiffs claims against Lynn Nelson are barred by his absolute and qualified immunity and his Motion to Dismiss should be Granted. 16 Berkeley County Commission The Fourth Circuit has established

Orum v. Haines

68 F. Supp. 2d 726 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Sep 21, 1999

Additionally, qualified immunity shields a governmental official from liability if the officer’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Therefore the Defendant, Warden Williams Haines is entitled to qualified immunity.

Pegg v. Klempa

119 F. Supp. 3d 488 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jul 31, 2015

Qualified immunity is abrogated only upon a showing that the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right and that such right was clearly established at the time the conduct occurred. Id. … Qualified Immunity: Clearly Established . This Court has already found that one prong of Saucier, the constitutional violation prong, has not been met.

Neiswonger v. Hennessey

89 F. Supp. 2d 766 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Feb 25, 2000

be entitled ta qualified immunity. … The Fourth Circuit has divided the analysis of qualified immunity into three parts: “First, we must identify the right allegedly violated; second, we must decide whether the right was clearly established at the time of the

Parnell v. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia

926 F. Supp. 570 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jan 29, 1996

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, or Marietta, Ohio) who would, consequently, not qualify as a responsible local attorney under the Rule. … The Rule clearly survives scrutiny under the Privileges and Immunities Clause.

Norris v. Detrick

918 F. Supp. 977 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Mar 1, 1996

In the alternative, it is believed that the -defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the excessive force claim. … Therefore, they are entitled to qualified immunity on the claim of excessive force set forth in Count One of the Complaint. The defendants also argue that they are entitled to summary judgment on Count Two.

Smith v. Scottsdale Insurance

40 F. Supp. 3d 704 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · May 16, 2014

Moulinage et Retorderie de Chavanoz, 487 F.2d 480, 484 (4th Cir.1973) (holding that “upon the termination of litigation the work product documents prepared incident thereto [do not] lose the qualified immunity extended to … Clearly then, they cannot establish substantial need and inability to otherwise obtain the information.

Smith v. Dodrill

718 F. Supp. 1293 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Aug 31, 1989

Finally, the defendant claims that he is entitled to qualified immunity in that he has acted in good faith and is protected from liability for damages arising out of the performance of his duties. … Although an official in a personal-capacity action may, depending on his position, be able to assert personal immunity defenses such as the qualified immunity defense raised by the defendant herein, the Court need not at

Santiago v. Clark

444 F. Supp. 1077 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jan 6, 1978

Code 1931, 19-23-1, et seq., as amended, clearly demonstrates that the Commission is a state agency charged with the supervision and control of horse racing. … According to a note in the West Virginia Law Review, whether a state agency qualifies for the protection of the constitutional immunity provision depends basically on two types of criteria — financial and functional.

Curry v. Weiford

389 F. Supp. 2d 704 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Sep 21, 2005

Additionally, the defendants have raised the defense of qualified immunity. … does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Carr-Lambert v. Grant County Board of Education

837 F. Supp. 2d 594 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Aug 11, 2011

It is undisputed that a government official may be shielded from liability for his or her conduct even if a plaintiffs rights were violated, unless that conduct violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … As a result, the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity at this time, and their motions for summary judgment on the state free speech claim are DENIED.

Wittkamper

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jun 22, 2026

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity can be afforded to government officials for discretionary acts taken in their official capacity. … Clearly Established Right (Prong Two) Now, the Court will assess whether it was clearly established that it violated the Fourth Amendment to hold Wittkamper in the prone position as

Crow v. McElroy Coal Co.

290 F. Supp. 2d 693 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jun 24, 2003

This Court finds that the proposed findings regarding his Title VII are not clearly erroneous. B. … To establish an ADA violation, the plaintiff must prove that (1) he has a disability; (2) he is otherwise qualified for the job in question; and (3) he was discharged solely because of his disability. See Doe v.