Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
1,047 results
1.56s
District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Oct 16, 2025
In the instant case, Defendant Bleavins is not entitled to qualified immunity because Plaintiff alleges a clearly established right concerning his claim of retaliation under the First Amendment. … In 2017, the Fourth Circuit held that an inmate’s right to file a prison grievance free from retaliation was clearly established under the First Amendment so as to preclude qualified immunity. Booker v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · Dec 16, 2025
Defendant Allen contends that vague assertions of inadequate oversight are insufficient to establish that he violated a clearly established right. … He further contends that the right to be freed from detention when legally entitled is clearly established, and Defendant Allen is not entitled to qualified immunity for violating that right.
Cited 0 timesUnknown537 F. Supp. 912 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Apr 22, 1982
In so doing the Court established a Judicial Inquiry Commission and Judicial Review Board. W.Va.Code, Appendix. … While the question has not been decided by the United States Supreme Court, the law of this circuit clearly holds that judges are not immune from equitable and declaratory relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Timmerman v.
Cited 5 timesPublishedHartman v. Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd.
789 F. Supp. 2d 701 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Apr 29, 2011
Our court of appeals lays a “heavy burden” upon a defendant removing a case on such grounds: “In order to establish that a nondiverse defendant has been fraudulently joined, the removing party must establish either: [t]hat … The best way to advance this objective is to accept the parties [as] joined ... unless joinder is clearly improper.
Cited 1 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · May 11, 2020
Qualified Immunity Defendant Cox also argues she is entitled to qualified immunity. In her briefs, she focuses her argument on her Fourth Amendment claim in Count One. … The Fourth Circuit recognized that West Virginia law “affords immunity ‘from personal liability for official acts if the involved conduct did not violate clearly established laws of which a reasonable official would have
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jul 15, 2025
Additionally, it would appear that these Defendants also enjoy at least qualified immunity from the Plaintiff’s claims. … Qualified immunity shields public officials from personal liability for performance of their official duties, provided that they do not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable
Cited 0 timesUnknown431 F. Supp. 2d 622 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · May 9, 2006
The immunity afforded employers is not easily lost. … Dismissal is also not warranted for the claims asserted against Gencorp in Counts IIIV for the reasons argued in Gencorp’s motion relating to the immunity established by § 23-4-2. 2 Employers are provided immunity from all
Cited 11 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 29, 2018
Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “[g]overnmental officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability for money damages so long ‘as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Conspiring together to initiate this scheme against the Plaintiff in a malicious and retaliatory manner violates clearly established constitutional rights, and the Defendants’ qualified immunity defense should be denied
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · Feb 6, 2018
Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity “shields executive officers ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Lastly, Defendant Allen argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because no clearly established right of Miller’s was violated. (See id.)
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · Feb 14, 2025
The Defendant concedes that use of OC spray against a compliant inmate who poses no threat, as alleged, is a violation of clearly established law. … In addition, he argues that WVDCR is not entitled to qualified immunity because the conduct was within the scope of employment, but clearly unlawful based on precedent regarding unnecessary use of OC spray.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 12, 2019
a clearly established law or constitutional duty.” … Therefore, in determining whether qualified immunity applies, the principal inquiry is whether a public official’s conduct “violate[s] clearly established laws of which a reasonable official would have known” or is “fraudulent
Cited 0 timesUnknownMooney v. Logan County Commission
District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jun 20, 2025
claim” against him, and “has failed to identify any clearly established law that Defendant Clemons violated” in support of his § 1983 claims. … Thus, even assuming arguendo that qualified immunity did not bar Plaintiff’s suit against Deputy Carter, Plaintiff has failed to state a plausible claim for relief pursuant to § 1983.
Cited 0 timesUnknownBrowning v. Max Biederman, Inc.
120 F. Supp. 313 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Apr 6, 1954
Act if the establishment qualifies as an exempt retail or service establishment by meeting all of the following requirements: “(1) The establishment must be engaged in making sales of goods or of services or of both. (2) … The undisputed facts and figures bring the defendant clearly within the exemption granted in Section 13(a) (2).
Cited 1 timesPublishedWriston v. West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources
District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 13, 2021
immunity and that qualified immunity “categorically bar[s]” Counts V, VI, and VIII of the Complaint. … See, e.g., Graham, 473 U.S. at 167 (noting qualified immunity is a “personal immunity defense”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · Nov 19, 2021
Under qualified immunity, government officials performing discretionary functions are generally shielded from liability for civil damage if their behavior does not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional … The qualified immunity inquiry is a two-step determination of “(1) whether the official violated a constitutional right; and if so (2) whether the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of its violation.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 18, 2025
Specifically, Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because “Plaintiff cannot put forth any genuine issue of fact to attempt to establish that these Defendants violated any clearly established statutory … In the instant case, Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because “Plaintiff cannot put forth any genuine issue of fact to attempt to establish that these Defendants violated any clearly established
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jul 3, 2018
“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional or other rights that a reasonable officer would have known.” … In determining whether qualified immunity applies, the Court must look at whether the plaintiff has demonstrated that a depravation of a constitutional right has occurred and whether that right was clearly established
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 29, 2018
Qualified Immunity Lastly, Defendant Snuffer argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity from the Plaintiff’s claims brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. … Under the qualified immunity doctrine, “[g]overnmental officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability for money damages so long ‘as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory
Cited 0 timesUnknownNapier v. County Commission of Lincoln County
District Court, S.D. West Virginia · May 16, 2019
Qualified immunity “shields government officials from liability for civil damages, provided that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights within the knowledge of a reasonable … Therefore, the Court finds Defendant Sowards did not use excessive force and he is entitled to qualified immunity from this suit.
Cited 0 timesUnknown767 F. Supp. 2d 617 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Feb 7, 2011
Rather, within the scope of the FTCA’s waiver of sovereign immunity, plaintiffs only seek to “establish that the improper conduct of the United States as alleged in the Complaint would give rise to liability for a private … As noted, the United States contends that “plaintiffs have failed to establish a waiver of sovereign immunity.” (Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss 2).
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna