Case law

Armstrong v. City of Greensboro

190 F. Supp. 3d 450 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 6, 2016

They also argue for *464 dismissal based on qualified immunity, asserting Plaintiff failed to plead sufficiently that Daughtry deprived him of his “clearly established constitutional rights.” … An officer is not entitled to qualified immunity if he has violated a clearly established constitutional right. See Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232 , 129 S.Ct. 808 .

Evans v. Bayer

684 F. Supp. 2d 1365 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 12, 2010

To overcome qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show (1) that the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) that this right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. Id. (citing Wilson v. … Clearly Established “It is ... appropriate for a district court to grant the defense of qualified immunity at the motion to dismiss stage if the complaint ‘fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional

Burke v. Twp. of Cheltenham

742 F. Supp. 2d 660 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 5, 2010

Federal “qualified immunity” has been established by case law, Harlow v. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , “[u]nless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement

Eagleston v. County of Suffolk

790 F. Supp. 416 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 22, 1992

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields governmental officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability if the conduct complained of “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Whether an official is protected by qualified immunity is determined by the objective reasonableness of the action, “assessed in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.”

Anglin v. City of Aspen

552 F. Supp. 2d 1205 · District Court, D. Colorado · Feb 29, 2008

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from individual liability when they are performing discretionary functions that do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Rittenhouse Entertainment, Inc. v. City of Wilkes-Barre

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 7, 2021

they therefore fail to establish qualified immunity. … Nevertheless, the court still concludes that O’Hara and McGonigle are entitled to qualified immunity because, as detailed above, the right at issue in this case was not clearly established at the time of the facts of this

Tiramani v. Johnson

307 F. Supp. 3d 31 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Feb 8, 2018

I agree that the defendants are protected by qualified immunity. … There was no "clearly established" law prohibiting warrantless entry in similar circumstances in the absence of a sign of a break-in.

Sampson v. City of Schenectady

160 F. Supp. 2d 336 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 16, 2001

Qualified Immunity 1. … General Standard for Qualified Immunity The affirmative defense of qualified immunity “shields public officials from liability for their discretionary acts that do ‘not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Searles v. Van Bebber

993 F. Supp. 1350 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jan 7, 1998

Defendants also claim that they are entitled to qualified immunity, which shields them from liability unless they violated clearly established constitutional or statutory norms. Anderson v. … Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity if their conduct was objectively reasonable in the light of clearly established law and the information which the possessed at the time of the alleged violation. Martin v.

Adeyemi v. Office of General Counsel for Booth Police Officers, National Security Agency

District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 20, 2021

Adeyemi has not alleged facts amounting to a violation of the Fourth Amendment or any other “clearly established” constitutional right, the booth police officers would be entitled to qualified immunity as to his claims … Vill. of Pinehurst, 810 F.3d 892, 907 (4th Cir. 2016) (“Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages, provided that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Watson v. City of Kansas City

185 F. Supp. 2d 1191 · District Court, D. Kansas · Nov 21, 2001

. • Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects state actors from liability when acting within the scope of their employment. … The Supreme Court has established a two-part approach to determine if qualified immunity applies.

Hawley v. Nelson

968 F. Supp. 1372 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Apr 4, 1997

Qualified immunity is available (1) if the law as it relates to the relevant facts was not clearly established or (2) if a reasonable official could have believed the alleged conduct was lawful in light of the clearly established … clearly established and defendants are entitled to at least qualified immunity from suit.

MacDonald v. Angelone

69 F. Supp. 2d 787 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Sep 2, 1999

The doctrine of good faith qualified immunity shields government employees performing discretionary functions from civil liability unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Second, courts must determine whether the right is clearly established. See id. (citing Collinson, 895 F.2d at 998 ).

Falkiewicz v. City of Westland

25 F. Supp. 2d 783 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Oct 26, 1998

Defendants claim that they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate any clearly established rights. 4 Standard of Review Qualified Immunity Defendants rely upon the doctrine of qualified immunity to … Under the qualified immunity doctrine, “government officials pferforming discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

Hill v. Washington State Department of Corrections

628 F. Supp. 2d 1250 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 31, 2009

Second, Plaintiffs contend that no individual Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity because a reasonable person would know that enforcing the DOC Policy violates a clearly established constitutional right. … Qualified Immunity Defendants also urge that they are entitled to qualified immunity because Plaintiffs have not alleged violation of a clearly established constitutional right and the pre-conviction eligibility requirement

Tsotesi v. Board of Education of the City School District

258 F. Supp. 2d 336 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 23, 2003

of Board policies violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.” 12 *339 Conclusion The motion of the BOE Defendants for judgment on the pleadings dismissing the complaint as to them is granted insofar … Vermont Dep’t of Educ., 313 F.3d 768 , 793 (2d Cir.2002) (holding that “a ruling on the availability of a qualified immunity defense would be premature” because “[t]he qualified immunity issue in this case turns on factual

Johnson v. Wilson

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 20, 2024

A court should not define “clearly established law at a high level of generality,” id. … Officer Dorghoud is not entitled to relief on Counts I, III, or IV Even considering the body-worn camera footage, Officer Dorghoud has not established his entitlement to qualified immunity or qualified privilege

Walker ex rel. T.W. v. City of New York

63 F. Supp. 3d 301 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 5, 2014

Defendants Robinson and White Are Entitled to Qualified Immunity 1) Caseworker Qualified Immunity “Immunity ordinarily should be decided by the court long before trial.” Hunter v. … Individual government actors performing discretionary tasks are entitled to qualified immunity if: “(a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant

Perkins v. Click

148 F. Supp. 2d 1177 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Jun 13, 2001

Alternatively, Defendants maintain they are entitled to qualified immunity because there was no clearly established law indicating their actions violated Plaintiffs constitutional rights. … has long been clearly established.

Idoux v. Lamar University System

828 F. Supp. 1252 · District Court, E.D. Texas · Jul 13, 1993

Qualified Immunity The question of whether qualified immunity will protect an official is one of law for the Court to decide. Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806, 2815-2816 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985). … To be entitled to qualified immunity, a governmental official must have been performing discretionary functions, and his conduct must not have violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable