Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersFD

10,000+ results

0.76s

  • Perez v. School Board

    917 F. Supp. 2d 1261 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 17, 2013

    Furthermore, because the Defendants have raised qualified immunity as a defense, Plaintiff must allege that the officers violated a clearly-established right. Williams, 102 F.3d at 1182 . … When qualified immunity is raised, Plaintiff must plead facts showing that, at the time of the beating the law clearly established that the force used by the officers was excessive.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Dohner v. Neff

    240 F. Supp. 2d 692 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 11, 2002

    Qualified Immunity In Harlow v. … Qualified Immunity for Neff To find a clearly established constitutional right, a district court must find binding precedent from the Supreme Court, its court of appeals, or itself. Ohio Civil Serv. Employees Ass’n. v.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Carter v. Butts County

    110 F. Supp. 3d 1325 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Jun 2, 2015

    “Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from suits in their individual capacities unless their conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … In wrongful arrest cases, the Eleventh Circuit has “defined the ‘clearly-established’ prong as an ‘arguable probable cause’ inquiry.” Moran v.

    Reversed on other grounds by David Carter v. Timothy Filbeck, 821 F.3d 1310 (2016)Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Robey v. Chester County

    946 F. Supp. 333 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 12, 1996

    Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), a court determines qualified immunity according to an objective standard: an official’s conduct must not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Only federal constitutional and statutory rights can be considered in evaluating a claim for qualified immunity under Harlow ; violations of clearly established state law alone are not sufficient. Davis v.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Kaufman v. Carter

    952 F. Supp. 520 · District Court, W.D. Michigan · Dec 9, 1996

    I conclude that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity on the ground that it was not “clearly established” that the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA apply to prisons. … Qualified immunity is not available where an official violates “clearly established statutory ... rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Viero v. Bufano

    901 F. Supp. 1387 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 28, 1995

    Immunity Búfano and Little also seek dismissal on qualified immunity grounds. … That is enough to strip them of any putative qualified immunity because, as Hamilton v.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • McIntosh v. Weinberger

    617 F. Supp. 107 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · May 24, 1984

    from suit under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Assuming arguendo, that the law was not clearly established at the time the results of the reconstruction panel were destroyed, defendant Turner’s defense of qualified immunity should be sustained.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Becerra v. Unified Government of Wyandotte County/Kansas City

    272 F. Supp. 2d 1223 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jul 25, 2003

    immunity’ Defendant Mots argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because his conduct violated no clearly established right of Plaintiffs. … Qualified immunity shields an individual government official performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as his conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Kanae v. Hodson

    294 F. Supp. 2d 1179 · District Court, D. Hawaii · Nov 5, 2003

    Hodson’s Qualified Immunity Defense. Hodson argues that he has qualified immunity with respect to Kanae’s claims. … Qualified immunity bars claims against government officials in their individual capacities if their conduct did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Sharp v. Kelsey

    918 F. Supp. 1115 · District Court, W.D. Michigan · Mar 13, 1996

    Qualified Immunity With regard to the manner of handling Ms. Sharp, defendants claim they are entitled to qualified immunity. … In the Sixth Circuit, “when a defendant moves for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, the plaintiff must: 1) identify a clearly established right alleged to have been violated; and 2) establish that a reasonable

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Thompson v. City of Clio

    765 F. Supp. 1066 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · May 2, 1991

    Qualified Immunity a. … were clearly established in April and May of 1990.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • White v. City of Lagrange

    952 F. Supp. 2d 1353 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Jul 3, 2013

    “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for individual public officials performing discretionary functions ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … White has failed to point to particularized case law showing that the right was clearly established.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Urbanique Production v. City of Montgomery

    428 F. Supp. 2d 1193 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Mar 28, 2006

    Pursuant to 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 … Qualified immunity bestows upon government officials a well-established “right” to avoid the burdens, costs and time of trial when the government official does not violate clearly-established constitutional norms.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Fleming v. State University of New York

    502 F. Supp. 2d 324 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 6, 2007

    clearly established legal rules then in effect.” … complains violated clearly established law.”

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Raspberry v. Johnson

    88 F. Supp. 2d 1319 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Feb 18, 2000

    Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil litigation and liability where “their conduct does not violate clearly established ... constitutional rights of which a reasonable … allegedly violated right was clearly established when the allegedly wrongful acts occurred.”

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Chavez v. Jefferson County, Texas

    District Court, E.D. Texas · Mar 21, 2023

    The qualified immunity defense has two prongs: (1) “whether an official’s conduct violated a statutory or constitutional right of the plaintiff”; and (2) “whether the right was clearly established … Regardless of qualified immunity’s origins, this Court is bound by Fifth Circuit precedent and Supreme Court precedent—both which recognize qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Delaney v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority

    24 F. Supp. 3d 121 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 4, 2014

    Qualified Immunity For much the same reason, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … “A right is clearly established and immunity will not issue only if ‘every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right.’ ” Id. at 50-51 (quoting Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Williams v. Lopes

    64 F. Supp. 2d 37 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Aug 16, 1999

    Assuming this case involves clearly established rights, the entitlement to qualified immunity generally turns on the particular facts of a case. Robison v. Via, 821 F.2d *42 913, 921 (2d Cir.1987). … The evidence before the Court clearly establishes that plaintiff cannot recall the events with any accuracy.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Lucas v. Henrico County School Board

    822 F. Supp. 2d 589 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Sep 30, 2011

    Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages, insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would … Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232 , 129 S.Ct. 808 (internal citations omitted).

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Roucchio v. Coughlin

    29 F. Supp. 2d 72 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 1998

    Qualified immunity shields government employees from liability for conduct that “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Id. … In order to establish qualified immunity, a defendant government official must demonstrate that his or her conduct “did not violate ‘clearly established rights’ of which a reasonable person would have known, or that it was

    Cited 2 timesPublished

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.