Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.79s
32 F. Supp. 2d 1235 · District Court, D. Colorado · Jan 21, 1999
Further, defendants contend that the individual defendants sued in their individual capacities are entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct that either the … Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from individual liability under section 1983 where their actions do not violate clearly established statutory
Cited 37 timesPublished170 F. Supp. 2d 727 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Oct 31, 2001
The defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity, as the complaint does not plead any alleged conduct that violated clearly and particularly established federal statutory or constitutional rights of … Because the plaintiff has failed to plead facts sufficient to establish a constitutional violation, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. 2. Was the Right Clearly Established?
Cited 5 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 29, 2022
denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity.” … was clearly established at the time of Cook’s alleged misconduct.
Cited 0 timesUnknown670 F. Supp. 729 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Sep 16, 1987
The Court in Anderson also held that the mere assertion of a clearly established right, at least in the context of the fourth amendment, is insufficient to defeat the qualified immunity defense. … Qualified immunity is not applicable.
Reversed on other grounds by Danese v. Asman, 875 F.2d 1239 (1989)Cited 5 timesPublished135 F. Supp. 3d 306 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 22, 2015
Once a defendant properly raises the defense of qualified- immunity, the plaintiff bears the initial burden of overcoming that defense by showing that the defendant violated the plaintiffs clearly established right. … But, as indicated above, in order to overcome the defense of qualified immunity, Plaintiffs must cite to cases or other law that recognize a clearly established right of a prisoner to have his marriage request promptly approved
Cited 3 timesPublished375 F. Supp. 3d 725 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 21, 2019
"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 … The Fifth Circuit has explained the "clearly established" prong as follows: Qualified immunity should not be denied unless the law is clear in the more particularized sense that reasonable officials should be "on notice that
Cited 6 timesPublished300 F. Supp. 2d 716 · District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Jan 27, 2004
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Defendants argue that even if the complaint states claims under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory
Cited 5 timesPublished963 F. Supp. 2d 1267 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Aug 9, 2013
Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.” Pearson v. … However, the Eleventh Circuit has “held time and again that clearly established general principles of law will seldom if ever suffice to strip a defendant of qualified immunity.” Harbert Intern., Inc. v.
Cited 17 timesPublished749 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 timesPublished335 F. Supp. 3d 818 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Aug 14, 2018
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 person would have known." Mullenix v. … Dec. 20, 2006) (holding that calling a police officer an "asshole" and an "Opie-Taylor-looking motherfucker" was protected speech, but finding qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established in 2003).
Cited 2 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 17, 2020
Harris, 935 F.3d 670, 675-76 (9th Cir. 2019) (stating that dismissal on 25 immunity grounds may qualify as a strike for failure to state a claim where the immunity defense 26 is clear on the face of the complaint); Washington … the face of the complaint, and 3 the entirety of the complaint is dismissed for a qualifying reason under the PLRA[]”).
Cited 0 timesUnknown730 F. Supp. 753 · District Court, E.D. Texas · Nov 8, 1989
If a reasonable police officer in the position of the defendant police officers would have known his or her use of force violated the clearly established law, it is objectively unreasonable. Graham v. … This court finds, taking the plaintiffs’ allegations as true, that a reasonable police officer in the position of the defendant police officers, would have known that the actions taken in the jail cell violated clearly established
Cited 2 timesPublished677 F. Supp. 882 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Jan 13, 1988
ground of qualified immunity. … qualified immunity.
Cited 2 timesPublished502 F. Supp. 2d 1224 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 18, 2007
in a constitutional violation of a clearly established right. … clearly established by case law or otherwise.
Cited 13 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 26, 2020
“Qualified immunity attaches when an official's conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Kisela v. … In determining whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, courts examine (1) whether “the official violated a statutory or constitutional right,” and (2) whether “the right was ‘clearly established’ at the
Cited 0 timesUnknown350 F. Supp. 3d 366 · District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 10, 2018
Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions "from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Because Stutzman has alleged facts that state a claim of a violation of clearly established law, the Court will not dismiss the claim at this stage based on the defense of qualified immunity. B.
Cited 39 timesPublished86 F. Supp. 3d 1294 · District Court, S.D. Alabama · Feb 5, 2015
immunity, the Court is required, sua sponte, to determine whether the allegations of the complaint reflect the violation of a clearly established right. … circumstances as denials of qualified immunity.
Cited 2 timesPublished718 F. Supp. 1460 · District Court, D. Idaho · Aug 4, 1989
This court has found no published decision which clearly defines the scope of qualified judicial immunity. This circuit has defined qualified immunity for jury commissioners and directors of jury services. … Under this qualified immunity, they were immune so long as their conduct did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable *1465 person would have known.” Id.
Cited 4 timesPublished199 F. Supp. 3d 1224 · District Court, D. Nebraska · Aug 9, 2016
were clearly established at the time it was taken. … But even assuming that Whitten has alleged a violation of his constitutional right, the contours of that right were not clearly established. *1233 The Court evaluates the defense of qualified immunity from the perspective
Cited 6 timesPublishedDukore v. District of Columbia
970 F. Supp. 2d 23 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 19, 2013
“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 … Arresting the plaintiffs An officer making an arrest is entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show that the seizure violates the Fourth Amendment.
Cited 5 timesPublished
Ask Donna