Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersFD

10,000+ results

0.70s

  • Hale v. Duvall

    268 F. Supp. 3d 1161 · District Court, D. Colorado · Jul 27, 2017

    P. 12(b)(6) based on the defense of qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for, civil damages, .insofar as their-conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

    Cited 55 timesPublished
  • Gerhardt v. Mares

    179 F. Supp. 3d 1006 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Jan 20, 2016

    Clearly Established Rights in the Qualified Immunity Analysis. … WOODS DID NOT VIOLATE GER-HARDT’S CLEARLY ESTABLISHED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND IS THUS ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Gill v. Devlin

    867 F. Supp. 2d 849 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 12, 2012

    Therefore, unless the pleadings plausibly state a claim of an objectively unreasonable violation of clearly-established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before full discovery is commenced … CONCLUSION Gill has plausibly alleged the violation of her clearly established equal-protection rights.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Pendleton v. Goord

    849 F. Supp. 2d 324 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 27, 2012

    Legal Standard Government actors may be shielded from liability for civil damages by qualified immunity, i.e., if their “conduct did not violate plaintiffs clearly established rights, or if it would have been objectively … Defendants argue that the Second Circuit’s decision in Earley did not clearly establish, for the purposes of qualified immunity, that the administrative imposition of a period of PRS violated a constitutional right.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Macri v. Brower

    District Court, N.D. Georgia · Sep 30, 2024

    Finally, to overcome the defendant’s assertion of qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show that the (7) constitutional right he contends was violated was clearly established. … Mims misapprehends exactly what law must be clearly established for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Byrd v. Haas

    District Court, E.D. Michigan · Nov 23, 2020

    Qualified Immunity for RLUIPA Claims Qualified immunity is unavailable for the RLUIPA claims in this case. … And qualified immunity only applies to claims for money damages, not claims for injunctive or declaratory relief. See Flagner v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Adams v. Lindsey

    759 F. Supp. 795 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 14, 1991

    A Clearly Established Seizure: In Anderson, supra, the Court explained that the relevant legal rule under which the qualified immunity issue is judged must be fact specific. … ’ entitlement to qualified immunity.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Maldonado v. Marthenz

    District Court, D. New Mexico · Jan 18, 2024

    For federal habeas petitions brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), Strickland is clearly established federal law. … See Williams, 529 U.S. at 390 (“It is past question that the rule set forth in Strickland qualifies as ‘clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.’”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Zwalesky v. Manistee County

    749 F. Supp. 815 · District Court, W.D. Michigan · Aug 16, 1990

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY All of the individual defendants that had contact with the decedent on the day of his death assert that they are immune from suit in the present action due to the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Although qualified immunity is somewhat akin to an affirmative defense, the defendant does not bear the burden of establishing that his alleged conduct did not violate clearly established law. Dominque v.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Estate of Aaron Bruce Cadman v. Dennis, et al.

    2018 DNH 018 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Jan 29, 2018

    Police officers “are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’” … (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). 5 The court focuses on the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis because it is dispositive of the excessive force claim. See Pearson v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Venisee v. Miami-Dade County

    District Court, S.D. Florida · May 28, 2025

    To qualify as clearly established, a legal principle “must be established with obvious clarity by the case law so that every objectively reasonable government official facing the circumstances would know that the official … was clearly established well before the night of the shooting in 2012.”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • White v. Taylor

    677 F. Supp. 882 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Jan 13, 1988

    ground of qualified immunity. … qualified immunity.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Moody v. Michigan Gaming Control Board

    202 F. Supp. 3d 756 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Aug 15, 2016

    Therefore, because a reasonable officer would have believed his actions to be lawful, the rights at issue were not clearly established. Accordingly, the Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on these claims. C. … Finally, the Defendants argue that they are still entitled to qualified immunity because any violation did not involve a clearly established right that a reasonable person would have known. Dkt. No. 144 at 30-31 (Pg.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • McCarty v. Stewart

    District Court, S.D. Alabama · Apr 22, 2021

    Jordan’s constitutional rights in light of the clearly established law at that time”); Lee v. … White, 703 F.3d 147, 152 (5th Cir. 1983)(finding the officer was entitled to qualified immunity because he was following an order of his supervisor in arresting the plaintiff and there

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Ford v. Retter

    840 F. Supp. 489 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 6, 1993

    The deputies are clearly entitled to qualified immunity.”); Jones v. City of Upper Arlington, 986 F.2d 1421 (6th Cir.1993); Walton v. City of Southfield, 995 F.2d 1331 (6th Cir.1993). … It also seems that once you have determined the need for the defense of [qualified immunity], ... as a matter of law ... the officer has acted unreasonably ... and has violated clearly established law. Yates v.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Jones v. American Alternative Insurance Corp

    District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Mar 31, 2022

    Nonetheless, the docttine of qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for claims against them in their individual capacities “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Dyer, 964 F.3d at 383-85 (citing pre-2020 cases for clearly established law). Thus, Plaintiffs have successfully overcome the Police Officer Defendants’ qualified immunity defense at the motion to dismiss stage.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Romero v. Bexar County

    993 F. Supp. 2d 658 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Jan 9, 2014

    Government officials performing discretionary functions are protected from civil liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity if their conduct violates no “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Qualified immunity is not only a defense to liability but also a immunity from suit. Pearson, 555 U.S. at 223 , 129 S.Ct. 808 .

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Whiting v. Tunica County

    222 F. Supp. 2d 809 · District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Jul 19, 2002

    — was also clearly established. … The Court notes, under the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis, that the contours of this constitutional violation for qualified immunity purposes were clearly established at the relevant time.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Hoefling v. City of Miami

    17 F. Supp. 3d 1227 · District Court, S.D. Florida · May 6, 2014

    “Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” Behrens v. … On a motion to dismiss, “[t]o evaluate claims of qualified immunity, the Court considers whether (1) the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether the right was ‘clearly established’ at

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Johnson v. Harris

    District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Aug 7, 2024

    “When a defendant raises a qualified immunity defense, the court must dismiss the action unless the plaintiff shows that (1) the defendant violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the right was clearly established … support for the notion that the law is clearly established.”).6 Accordingly, Ms. Johnson’s Fourth Amendment claim against Ms. Shelton-Denley is barred by qualified immunity.7 B.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

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.