Case law

Wilson v. City of Des Moines

160 F. Supp. 2d 1038 · District Court, S.D. Iowa · Jul 25, 2001

Katz, — U.S. -, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (June 18, 2001) changed the landscape of qualified immunity. … Second, if a violation is established, courts are to determine whether the right was clearly established “on a more specific level than recognized by the [Ninth Circuit] Court of Appeals.” Id. at 2155.

Stanfield v. City of Lima

244 F. Supp. 3d 638 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 24, 2017

Nevertheless, the doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from suit if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … The second inquiry, whether qualified immunity shields an officer from suit, depends on whether, at the time of the incident, “the right was clearly established ... in light of the specific context of the case, not as a broad

Moore v. City of Ferguson

213 F. Supp. 3d 1138 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Oct 4, 2016

“Qualified immunity is a defense available to government officials if they have not violated ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Amrine v. … Qualified immunity determinations are based on a two-part inquiry.

Kroll v. United States Capitol Police

683 F. Supp. 824 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 22, 1987

The Court now briefly elaborates on the claims of qualified immunity. … In Harlow the Supreme Court recognized that governmental officials may be entitled to qualified immunity “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Joseph v. Donahue

392 F. Supp. 3d 973 · District Court, D. Maine · May 28, 2019

"Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability and the burdens of litigation in a § 1983 action *984 unless the official's conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which … A police officer is entitled to qualified immunity unless the facts shown by the plaintiff establish "(1) that a plaintiff's constitutional rights have been violated, and (2) those rights were so clearly established at the

Greenaway v. County of Nassau

97 F. Supp. 3d 225 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 31, 2015

The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was clearly established at the time of the violation.” Garcia, 43 F.Supp.3d at 289 . … .-, 134 S.Ct. 1861, 1866 , 188 L.Ed.2d 895 (2014) (noting that courts evaluating qualified immunity must “draw[] inferences in favor of the nonmovant, even when ... a court decides only the clearly-established prong of the

Hermann v. Cook

240 F. Supp. 2d 626 · District Court, W.D. Kentucky · Jan 22, 2003

Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages where their conduct does “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Defendants bear the burden of pleading the qualified immunity defense, but Plaintiff bears the burden of showing that Defendants’ conduct violated a right so clearly established that a rea *630 sonable official would have

Johnson v. City of Ecorse

137 F. Supp. 2d 886 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 29, 2001

Qualified Immunity Officers Smith and Herring plead the defense of qualified immunity. … The standard for that defense is that governmental officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity, which shields them from civil damages, provided their conduct did not violate a clearly-established

District Council 20, American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees v. District of Columbia

150 F. Supp. 2d 136 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 10, 2001

For purposes of qualified immunity, a right is “clearly established” if “the contours of that right [are] sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.” … immunity as to these claims which have not been clearly established in this or any other circuit.

Gunasekera v. Irwin

517 F. Supp. 2d 999 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 26, 2007

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity, or “good faith” immunity, is an affirmative defense that a defendant state official may raise. Siegert v. Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 231 , 111 S.Ct. 1789 , 114 L.Ed.2d 277 (1991). … Even if the Court found that Graduate Faculty status constitutes a protected property interest, this interest is not clearly established.

T.S. v. Gabbard

860 F. Supp. 2d 384 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · May 9, 2012

On the other hand, the Defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity on the Plaintiffs’ claims because their actions, in executing the BRJDC Body ID process, did not violate clearly established statutory … Applying these standards in this case, it is the Plaintiffs who bear the burden of establishing that the Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Prager v. LaFaver

103 F. Supp. 2d 1278 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jun 16, 2000

Once a defendant raises a qualified immunity defense, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show both facts and law to establish that the defendant is not entitled to a qualified immunity. Dixon v. … Therefore, the issue before the court is whether those rights were clearly established at the time of the deprivation. B.

Doe v. Ohio State Univ.

323 F. Supp. 3d 962 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 20, 2018

that right was clearly established.' " Miami Univ. , 882 F.3d at 604 (quoting Colvin v. … certainly clearly established at all times pertinent to this action....'

Aspinwall v. Herrin

879 F. Supp. 1227 · District Court, S.D. Georgia · Dec 27, 1994

Herrin is entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs’ claim because it was not clearly established in January of 1993 that a Georgia sheriff was bound by a county merit system. … Under the objective reasonableness standard for qualified immunity, Plaintiffs have the burden of proving that Herrin’s actions violated clearly established constitutional law.

Doe v. Hamilton Cnty. Bd. of Educ.

329 F. Supp. 3d 543 · District Court, E.D. Tennessee · Aug 6, 2018

unreasonable in light of the clearly established constitutional right." … To overcome qualified immunity, the plaintiff must demonstrate the right allegedly violated was "clearly established" at the time of the violation. Pearson , 555 U.S. at 236 , 129 S.Ct. 808 .

Schwab v. Wood

767 F. Supp. 574 · District Court, D. Delaware · Jun 12, 1991

Qualified Immunity A. … Standard for Qualified Immunity State officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which

Mossey v. City of Galveston, Tex.

94 F. Supp. 2d 793 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 25, 2000

Plaintiff’s Claim of Unlawful Arrest Is Barred by Qualified Immunity An individual has a clearly established right to be free from unlawful arrest. See Duckett v. City of Cedar Park, 950 F.2d 272, 278 (5th Cir.1992). … Plaintiff’s Claim of Excessive Force Is Not Barred by Qualified Immunity Established law clearly provides that Plaintiff has a Fourteenth Amendment right to be free from the use of excessive force by police.

Mandola v. County of Nassau

222 F. Supp. 3d 203 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2016

and qualified immunity doctrines. … Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Starr v. Warden, et al.

2006 DNH 110 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Sep 27, 2006

Qualified Immunity. … A government official is entitled to qualified immunity from personal liability if the challenged "■'conduct [did] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Weigle v. Pifer ex rel. City of Vienna Police Department

139 F. Supp. 3d 760 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Oct 14, 2015

These material disagreements preclude the application of qualified immunity to the officers at this juncture. The right to be free from excessive force during an arrest is a clearly established constitutional right. … Our Court of Appeals has explained that, in circumstances where qualified immunity is invoked, if there is a “genuine question of material fact regarding ‘[w]hether the conduct allegedly violative of [such a clearly established