Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersF

10,000+ results

1.80s

  • Edwards v. Gilbert

    867 F.2d 1271 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 28, 1989

    Joyner, 865 F.2d 1187, 1189 (11th Cir.1989). 6 Once a defendant advances a defense of qualified immunity, he is entitled to summary judgment unless "the legal norms allegedly violated by the defendant were clearly established … established" for purposes of qualified immunity at the time of Molbert's death.

    Cited 85 timesPublished
  • Timothy Ryan v. Burlington County, New Jersey, and Burlington County, Harold Colburn, Jr., Michael J. Conda, Catherine A. Costa, Henry J. Metzger, Robert C. Shinn, Michael J. Hogan, and Burlington County Solicitor's Office, Defendants/third Party v. Maurice Scott, Third Party and John Bradman, Individually and Officially as Warden of Burlington County Jail, Defendants/third Party v. Maurice Scott, Third Party Appeal of Harold Colburn, Jr., Michael Conda, Catherine H. Costa, Henry J. Metzger and Robert C. Shinn, Jr

    889 F.2d 1286 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 21, 1989

    If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct. 24 Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. at 2738 . 25 … , then those officials must be held accountable for instances where their actions violate clearly established rights.

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • Lincoln v. Barnes

    855 F.3d 297 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 20, 2017

    Doctrine of Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Clearly Established Law The second part of the qualified immunity inquiry looks to whether the right was clearly established at the time of the violation.

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Maresca v. County of Bernalillo

    804 F.3d 1301 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 22, 2015

    On cross- motions for summary judgment, the district court held that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity because they had not violated clearly established Fourth Amendment standards. … Because the reasonableness inquiry overlaps with the qualified immunity 21 analysis, a qualified immunity defense is of less value when raised in defense of

    Cited 42 timesPublished
  • Heitschmidt v. The City of Houston

    161 F.3d 834 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 16, 1998

    With regard to his unlawful detention claim, Heitschmidt asserts his clearly established right to be free from unreasonable seizure of his person, a right which he maintains includes the clearly established right to be … defense of qualified immunity.’”

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Lancaster v. Monroe County

    116 F.3d 1419 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 11, 1997

    The Clearly Established Law 29 At the time of Lancaster's arrest on March 6, 1995, it was clearly established that a jail official violates a pre-trial detainee's Fourteenth Amendment right to due process if he acts with … Because the law clearly established that such conduct violated a pre-trial detainee's Fourteenth Amendment right to due process, the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. B.

    Overruled on other grounds by LeFrere v. Quezada, 588 F.3d 1317 (2009)Cited 137 timesPublished
  • Adkins v. Rodriguez

    59 F.3d 1034 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 6, 1995

    Having raised the defense of qualified immunity, defendant then places the onus on the plaintiff to establish defendant has violated a clearly established law. Hovater v. Robinson, 1 F.3d 1063, 1066 (10th Cir.1993). … Because qualified immunity is an affirmative defense to a section 1983 action, providing immunity from suit from the outset, we have stated, "[t]he question of qualified immunity therefore dovetails almost precisely with

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Christopher P. ex rel. Norma P. v. Marcus

    915 F.2d 794 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 27, 1990

    , because the EAHCA’s applicability was not clearly established at the time the action arose. … Qualified Immunity for Violations of the EAHCA “[Gjovernment officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

    Cited 33 timesPublished
  • Knisley v. Pike County Joint Vocational School District

    604 F.3d 977 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 14, 2010

    The defendants may still be entitled to qualified immunity if their actions did *982 not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Our Circuit’s clearly established ease law on this issue put the school and its employees on notice that this search was unconstitutional, so defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity protection.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Glenn v. City of Tyler

    242 F.3d 307 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 22, 2001

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity protects government officials who perform discretionary functions from liability “unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional … established law.”

    Cited 298 timesPublished
  • Hydrick v. Hunter

    449 F.3d 978 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 1, 2006

    Thus, there are two bodies of law from which we might draw "clearly established" law for qualified immunity purposes: first, where the SVPs claim a violation of a right that is clearly established even in the prison context … established" law for qualified immunity purposes: first, where the SVPs claim a violation of a right that is clearly established even in the prison context, and second, where the SVPs claim a violation of a right that is

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Russell v. Coughlin

    910 F.2d 75 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 2, 1990

    On the eve of trial, defendants moved for summary judgment arguing that because Russell had no clearly established liberty interest in remaining out of keeplock they were protected by qualified immunity. … Even when such rights are clearly established, qualified immunity also protects a government official "if it was objectively reasonable for [the official] to believe that his acts did not violate those rights."

    Cited 63 timesPublished
  • Marcavage v. National Park Service

    666 F.3d 856 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 2, 2012

    The District Court then found that Saperstein and Crane were entitled to qualified immunity from both the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment claims because Marcavage’s First Amendment rights were not clearly established … As noted above, to strip Saperstein and Crane of qualified immunity requires the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 46 timesPublished
  • Gubitosi v. Kapica

    154 F.3d 30 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 19, 1998

    Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 309 , 116 S.Ct. 834 , 133 L.Ed.2d 773 (1996)), and proceed to consider whether the qualified immunity defense is established as a matter of law. 4 Here the gravamen of Kapica's qualified immunity … As a result, his qualified immunity defense is established as a matter of law. 13 (2) Accordingly, we vacate so much of the district court's order of May 9, 1997 as denied Kapica's motion for summary judgment based on qualified

    Cited 63 timesPublished
  • Holeman v. City of New London

    425 F.3d 184 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 30, 2005

    III Qualified immunity “shields police officers acting in their official capacity from suits for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , unless their actions violate clearly-established rights of which an objectively reasonable … objectively unreasonable under clearly established federal law.

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Angela McCullough v. Ernest N. Finley, Jr.

    907 F.3d 1324 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 29, 2018

    The Mayor and the Chiefs Enjoy Qualified and State-Agent Immunity from the Jailees’ Complaint. … “Qualified immunity shields government officials acting within their discretionary authority from liability unless the officials ‘violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

    Cited 300 timesPublished
  • Lanman v. Hinson

    529 F.3d 673 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 17, 2008

    affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields public officials who perform discretionary functions from tort liability, so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established rights viewed under the applicable constitutional standard

    Cited 748 timesPublished
  • Orem v. Rephann

    523 F.3d 442 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 28, 2008

    Hence, qualified immunity will shield Deputy Rephann from suit if “a reasonable officer” could have believed tasering Orem was lawful, in light of the clearly established law and the information Deputy Re-phann possessed … Rather, Deputy Rephann used the taser to punish or intimidate Orem — a use that is not objectively reasonable, is contrary to clearly established law, and not protected by qualified immunity. Y.

    Abrogated on other grounds by Wilkins v. Gaddy, 559 U.S. 34 (2010)Cited 109 timesPublished
  • Bator v. Hawaii

    39 F.3d 1021 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 8, 1994

    Qualified immunity protects state officials from section 1983 liability if their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … The defendants argue, however, that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutional right to be free of sexual harassment was not clearly established during the period of Bator’s employment.

    Cited 88 timesPublished
  • Cynthia Archer v. John Chisholm

    870 F.3d 603 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2017

    It  granted  the  Investigators’  motion  for  judgment  on  the  pleadings on qualified immunity grounds and noted that the  Prosecutors also were entitled to qualified immunity.  …  right that was clearly established at the time of  the challenged conduct.” 

    Cited 281 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.