Case law

Daniels v. D'AURIZO

564 F. Supp. 2d 194 · District Court, W.D. New York · Jul 9, 2008

Nevertheless, I find that even if probable cause was lacking or questionable, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields public officials from an action for civil damages, to the extent that their challenged acts do not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

Morgan-Tyra v. City of St. Louis

District Court, E.D. Missouri · Sep 22, 2022

An officer is entitled to qualified immunity unless the evidence establishes (1) a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the violation such that a reasonable … State Univ., 495 F.3d 591, 594 (8th Cir. 2007) (“Although the defendant bears the burden of proof for [qualified immunity], the plaintiff must demonstrate that the law was clearly established.”); Johnson-El v.

Lazarus

District Court, W.D. Virginia · Mar 4, 2026

Qualified Immunity. … See id. at 368 (“[A]s Defendants have not presented any penological interest . . . and [the plaintiff’s] right was clearly established, we hold that Defendants have not shown that they are entitled to qualified immunity

Blackman v. Butler

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Dec 9, 2019

Qualified Immunity Defendants object to Judge Sison’s conclusion that they are not entitled to qualified immunity on Blackman’s due process claim with regard to his … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009) (to determine whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, a court must consider whether there is a violation of a constitutional right and whether that right was clearly established

MOUNTAIN v. DOZIER

District Court, M.D. Georgia · Aug 17, 2021

Accordingly, when a defendant raises the defense of qualified immunity in a motion to dismiss, the court must take the plaintiff’s allegations as true and determine whether they assert a violation of a clearly established … Beach, 561 F.3d 1288, 1291 (11th Cir. 2009) (stating that to overcome qualified immunity a plaintiff must establish that “the officer’s conduct amounted to a constitutional violation” and “the right violated was clearly

Gordon v. Katz

934 F. Supp. 79 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 17, 1996

It has also been clearly established that in order for legislative immunity to attach, the acts complained of must not only be substantively legislative but also procedurally legislative. Ryan v. … Plaintiffs argue that in order for legislative immunity to apply, accepted and established legislative procedures must be followed.

Williams v. City of Mount Vernon

428 F. Supp. 2d 146 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 14, 2006

Qualified Immunity 2 “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields police officers acting in their *154 official capacity from suits for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , unless their actions violate clearly-established rights … Qualified immunity can be established in three ways: (1) if defendant’s acts did not violate a clearly established constitutional right; (2) if it remains unclear as to whether an exception permitted such acts; and (3) if

Perkins

District Court, N.D. Alabama · Mar 31, 2026

The Supreme Court has declared that the test of “clearly established” law cannot apply at a high level of generality; instead, to deny qualified immunity, “the right the official is alleged to have violated … Dep’t of Corrections, 71 F.4th 1324, 1333 (11th Cir. 2023) (“For purposes of qualified immunity, decisions of the Supreme Court, the Eleventh Circuit, or the appropriate state supreme court can announce clearly established

Lansdell v. Miller

District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Feb 3, 2020

clearly established law.” … Qualified immunity calls for a bifurcated test in which the court must first determine (1) “whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established

Leath v. Webb

323 F. Supp. 3d 882 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Jun 29, 2018

The officers and nurses did not have "fair warning" that their actions would violate a clearly established constitutional right, and they are entitled to qualified immunity. See Baynes v. … Because officers have "fair warning" that using force against a subdued suspect violates clearly established constitutional law, qualified immunity cannot bar Leath's claim against Webb.

Holland v. City of New York

197 F. Supp. 3d 529 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 24, 2016

Although the Court is permitted to determine whether a constitutional right exists before examining whether it was clearly established as part of the qualified immunity analysis, it declines to do so here. … Wright, 597 F.3d 532, 536 (2d Cir.2010) (finding the defendant prison employees entitled to qualified immunity with respect to inmate's First Amendment and RLUIPA claims because it had not been clearly established by the

Meekison v. Voinovich

17 F. Supp. 2d 725 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 21, 1998

Meekison’s Claim Under the ADA To establish a prima facie case under the ADA, Meekison must show: (1) she was disabled within the meaning of the statute at the time of her employment; (2) she was qualified to perform the … Prima Facie Case To establish a prima facie ease under the ADEA, Meekison must show the following: a) membership in the protected class (between the ages of 40 and 70); b) that she applied and was qualified for a promotion

Howard v. Fisk

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 18, 2020

Thus, the Court must conclude that Fisk is entitled to qualified immunity and dismiss all individual capacity claims against her. See Estate of Walker v. … Wallace, 881 F.3d 1056, 1060 (8th Cir. 2018) (“An individual is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”)

Blankenship v. Stewart

District Court, D. Nevada · Nov 20, 2020

Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 17 (2009) (“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil 18 damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Therefore, this Court properly found 20 that URP members were entitled to qualified immunity. 21 Finally, Defendants argue that Stewart and Filson are not entitled to qualified immunity 22 and this

Bailey v. Hughes

815 F. Supp. 2d 1246 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Sep 30, 2011

The Court should grant a motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds “if the plaintiffs complaint fails to allege a violation of a clearly established constitutional or statutory right.” Williams v. … Case law need not arise out of factually identical situations to clearly establish law for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis. Id. at 1351 .

Handy v. Fisher

District Court, D. Colorado · Jul 1, 2020

Plaintiffs claim that by neglecting to argue that the law was not clearly established defendants failed to meet their burden of pleading and developing their qualified immunity defense. … However, the qualified immunity analysis only considers what law was clearly established “at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.” Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 129 S. Ct. 808, 811, 172 L.

Kindrow v. Benson

District Court, E.D. Michigan · Nov 19, 2021

[And] sometimes [qualified immunity] [is] best resolved in a motion to dismiss,” particularly where the complaint itself establishes the defense. Siefert v. … Indeed, “[u]nless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.”

ELLIS v. LAWSON

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 17, 2025

"Qualified immunity is a doctrine that 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 … Defendants frame their qualified immunity argument (as it relates to the conditions claim rather than the medical deliberate indifference claim) as follows: It has not been clearly established that using a squeegee

Knapp v. Goudschaal

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 11, 2025

employees are not entitled to qualified immunity on judicial 5 deception claims.” … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 236 (2009) (holding that courts 21 have discretion to consider the two prongs of qualified immunity, whether a constitutional right 22 was violated and whether that right was clearly established

Farid v. Goord

200 F. Supp. 2d 220 · District Court, W.D. New York · Feb 9, 2002

Qualified immunity does not bar declaratory and injunctive relief. Allen v. Coughlin, 64 F.3d 77, 81 (2d Cir.1995). … Even if qualified immunity were established in this case, it would not provide grounds for dismissal of all of Farid’s claims. Id. at 81 . It is a defense which defendants must plead and prove. Duamutef v. J.M.