Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.69s
349 F. Supp. 2d 1358 · District Court, D. Kansas · Dec 14, 2004
To defeat qualified immunity, plaintiff must allege a clearly established right and allege that defendant violated it. The allegations, however, need not contain specific dates and times of each alleged infraction. … For purposes of qualified immunity, the next question is whether plaintiffs’ rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments were clearly established at the time of the alleged violations.
Cited 20 timesPublished137 F. Supp. 2d 1326 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Jun 1, 2000
the defendant violated clearly established law. … To overcome qualified immunity, the plaintiffs must show that: (1) the defendant violated a federal constitutional right; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the violation. See Santamorena v.
Cited 3 timesPublishedRockefeller v. United States Court of Appeals Office, for the Tenth Circuit Judges
248 F. Supp. 2d 17 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 7, 2003
The Supreme Court has established two avenues by which public officials may receive immunity from personal liability in a civil action for damages: absolute and qualified immunity. … A public official performing a discretionary function receives qualified immunity in a civil action, provided that his or her conduct does not violate “clearly established federal statutory or constitutional rights” of which
Cited 74 timesPublished256 F. Supp. 3d 719 · District Court, W.D. Michigan · Jun 21, 2017
Once the qualified immunity defense is raised, the plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating both that the challenged conduct violates a constitutional or statutory right and that the right was so clearly established at … However, “to satisfy the second prong of the [qualified-immunity] .standard, plaintiff must show that the right was clearly established in a ‘particularized sense,’ such that a reasonable officer confronted with the same
Cited 3 timesPublished97 F. Supp. 2d 336 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 31, 2000
Layne, 526 U.S. 603 , 119 S.Ct. 1692, 1697 , 143 L.Ed.2d 818 (1999) (quotation omitted). “ ‘Clearly established’ for qualified immunity purposes means that the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable … Even where the plaintiffs rights and the scope of the officials’ permissible conduct are clearly established, the qualified immunity defense protects a governmental actor if it was “objectively reasonable” for the actor to
Cited 2 timesPublished950 F. Supp. 1365 · District Court, E.D. Tennessee · Apr 12, 1996
legal rules that were “clearly established” at the time it was taken. … that their conduct violated any of plaintiffs’ clearly established constitutional rights.
Cited 3 timesPublished871 F. Supp. 2d 39 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · May 9, 2012
“The defendants are entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the facts alleged or shown by the plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional right and (2) such right was clearly established at the time of the defendants … “A right is clearly established only if it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he confronted.” Id.
Cited 10 timesPublishedNguyen v. Louisiana State Board of Cosmetology
236 F. Supp. 3d 947 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Feb 20, 2017
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 … Qualified Immunity on Plaintiffs’ Race Discrimination Claims The right to be free from invidious racial discrimination is clearly established. See, e.g., Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 , 25 L.Ed. 664 (1880).
Cited 1 timesPublishedStone v. Olderbak Georgetown/Willows LLC
District Court, D. Nebraska · Mar 1, 2024
The Order Is Not Clearly Erroneous Part of Defendant’s first objection and Defendant’s third objection assert that the Order is clearly erroneous. … Dillard’s, Inc., 643 F.3d 607, 613 (8th Cir. 2011) (explaining that the possibility of a different result does not establish that the result is clearly erroneous).
Cited 0 timesUnknown206 F. Supp. 2d 1119 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jun 6, 2002
Thus, Nordeen’s conduct, in filing a sworn complaint and sworn affidavit stating the facts purporting to establish probable cause, is entitled to qualified, not absolute immunity. … of ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” 23 Plaintiffs argument that Nordeen is not entitled to qualified immunity is based on three premises: (1) that
Cited 3 timesPublished835 F. Supp. 2d 836 · District Court, C.D. California · Dec 20, 2011
establish constitutional precedent on questions that do not frequently arise in cases in which a qualified immunity defense is unavailable; and when few judicial resources would be conserved by considering only the “clearly … “An officer conducting a search is entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment.” Pearson v.
Cited 1 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. California · Jun 12, 2025
immunity grounds. … Under Ninth Circuit law, qualified immunity is not 4 available to private defendants in a section 1983 suit. Danielson v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownHoward v. Board of Education of Sycamore Community Unit School District No. 427
893 F. Supp. 808 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 21, 1995
Qualified Immunity Weleker contends he is entitled to qualified immunity as to plaintiffs section 1983 claim because there is no clearly established law that he had a duty to take action in response to the students’ allegedly … Absent allegations stating a violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery. Id.
Cited 19 timesPublishedHunt v. City of Toledo Law Department
881 F. Supp. 2d 854 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 30, 2012
Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001), the Supreme Court established a two part test for determining the applicability of qualified immunity in § 1983 actions. … As a general rule, the default position is that qualified immunity applies.
Cited 14 timesPublished49 F. Supp. 3d 489 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Sep 24, 2014
Embody, 695 F.3d at 581 . *501 Plaintiff fails to meet the clearly-established-right prong for the qualified immunity analysis. … Neither of these sources provides a basis for finding a clearly established constitutional right for purposes of qualified immunity. Barrett, 388 F.3d at 972.
Cited 11 timesPublished952 F. Supp. 757 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Oct 2, 1996
Both Sanders and Parrish claim they are immune from suit under the well-established doctrine of qualified immunity. … a qualified immunity defense. 11 .
Cited 8 timesPublishedHouck v. City of Prairie Village
942 F. Supp. 493 · District Court, D. Kansas · Sep 27, 1996
was clearly established when the alleged violation occurred.” … Therefore, he is entitled to qualified immunity from liability.
Cited 3 timesPublished293 F. Supp. 3d 282 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 22, 2018
Qualified Immunity "Once qualified immunity is pleaded, plaintiff's complaint will be dismissed unless defendant's alleged conduct, when committed, violated 'clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Sikirica is not entitled to qualified immunity at this time. See Wise v.
Cited 31 timesPublishedRichards v. Metropolitan Police Department Officer Jennifer Gelsomino
240 F. Supp. 3d 173 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 3, 2017
“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 … On the facts as currently alleged, then, Gelsomino is not entitled to qualified immunity because she violated a clearly established constitutional right when she arrested Richards without a warrant or probable cause.
Cited 4 timesPublishedPenlyn Development Corp. v. Incorporated Village of Lloyd Harbor
51 F. Supp. 2d 255 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 16, 1999
Qualified Immunity The defendant also moves for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … Even where the plaintiffs rights and the scope of the officials’ permissible conduct are clearly established, the qualified immunity defense protects a governmental actor if it was “objectively reasonable” for the actor to
Cited 21 timesPublished
Ask Donna