Case law

Fink v. Gonzalez

911 F. Supp. 332 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 8, 1996

Fink was objectively reasonable under clearly established law. … In general terms, it is well understood that qualified immunity protects gov- *335 emment officials from civil liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory of constitutional rights of

(PC) Hardney v. Warren

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 5, 2022

Qualified Immunity 2 Alternatively, Kumeh lays claim to qualified immunity. … See Moonin, 868 F.3d 13 at 873-74 (denying qualified immunity because controlling Ninth Circuit authority established the 14 applicable general rules and cases from three other circuit courts and several district courts

Wares v. Vanbebber

319 F. Supp. 2d 1237 · District Court, D. Kansas · May 28, 2004

Qualified Immunity Defendants contend that the doctrine of qualified immunity warrants summary judgment against the plaintiff. … “Qualified immunity shields public officials from section 1983 liability if them actions did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Axson-Flynn

Cole Ex Rel. Cole v. Newton Special Municipal Separate School District

676 F. Supp. 749 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Jun 10, 1987

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The individual defendants assert the defense of qualified immunity from liability for damages. … Because the constitutional right alleged to have been violated was clearly established, defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity, and therefore their motion to dismiss on that basis should be denied.

Sheppard v. Leuze

District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 27, 2022

Finally, the court notes that many cases involving an order to leave a home “are decided on qualified immunity grounds.” … App’x 811, 813 (2d Cir. 2013) (explaining that a defendant “faces a formidable hurdle” in raising qualified immunity at the motion to dismiss stage because entitlement to immunity must be

Rodriguez Esteras v. Solivan Diaz

266 F. Supp. 2d 270 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · May 29, 2003

Therefore, our qualified immunity inquiry turns on whether Plaintiffs Fourth Amendment right to be free from malicious prosecution was clearly established in March 2000, when the alleged violation occurred. … establishes’ law for purposes of a qualified immunity analysis.”

Cole v. Shadoan

782 F. Supp. 2d 428 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Mar 2, 2011

Additionally, there is no evidence of a “clearly established” right of the Plaintiff that was violated by these Defendants. … Plaintiff claims there was an obvious violation of his clearly established rights by Shadoan, but there is no evidence of such a violation by these Defendants.

Strachan v. Ashe

548 F. Supp. 1193 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 13, 1982

of a *1198 defense based upon qualified good faith immunity. … description of qualified immunity set forth in Scheuer v.

Livingston v. Desoto Independent School District

391 F. Supp. 2d 463 · District Court, N.D. Texas · May 12, 2005

Qualified Immunity The threshold question the court must answer with regard to the claims against Goad and Galloway is whether they are entitled to qualified immunity. See Mangieri v. … And, it is well-established that an individual officer’s qualified immunity does not protect a municipality.” Id.

Alexander v. Beale Street Blues Co., Inc.

108 F. Supp. 2d 934 · District Court, W.D. Tennessee · Mar 19, 1999

Qualified Immunity Jones and Whipple argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity notwithstanding the court’s determination regarding the merits of plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment claims. … The Court has expanded on this holding and has made it clear that qualified immunity involves a two part inquiry: a court must determine whether the right at issue was clearly established and whether a reasonable official

Dorsey v. District of Columbia

234 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 11, 2017

“Although government officials may be sued in their individual capacities for damages . . . qualified immunity protects officials from liability ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … As to the Defendant Officers, “the protection of qualified immunity is available if “a reasonable officer could have believed that [his actions] were lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the officers

Hulstedt v. City of Scottsdale

884 F. Supp. 2d 972 · District Court, D. Arizona · Aug 6, 2012

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 … The Ninth Circuit held that the officers in Boyd were protected by qualified immunity, . but the case itself serves to clearly establish the law as of 2004. .

Kregler v. City of New York

987 F. Supp. 2d 357 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 9, 2013

to qualified immunity from suit. … A government official is entitled to qualified immunity when “(1) Plaintiff fails to allege a violation of a federal right; (2) the right alleged was not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation; or (3) the

DeMayo v. Nugent

475 F. Supp. 2d 110 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 21, 2007

As a result of not finding the constitutional right at stake “clearly established,” this Court is not compelled to reach the third prong of qualified immunity. … a “clearly established” rule.

U.S. Tobacco Coop., Inc. v. Big S. Wholesale of Va., LLC

365 F. Supp. 3d 604 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 19, 2019

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for a statutory or constitutional violation so long as they can reasonably believe that their conduct does not violate clearly established law. Harlow v. … Accordingly, as the rights alleged to have been violated were not clearly established, the Big Sky defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiffs' federal RICO claims. B.

Munz v. Ryan

752 F. Supp. 1537 · District Court, D. Kansas · Nov 26, 1990

[Ojnce a defendant raises a qualified immunity defense the plaintiff assumes the burden of showing that the defendant has violated clearly established law. … Regardless of the reasonableness of the officers’ actions under clearly established law at the time of the search, the defense of qualified immunity is unavailable to the city. Ross v.

Egervary v. Young

152 F. Supp. 2d 737 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 22, 2001

In Harlow, the Court held that qualified immunity shields government officials from suit for actions taken within the scope of their employment unless they have violated “clearly established [federal] statutory or constitutional … I agree that once the conduct at issue is established, the question of whether that conduct violates a clearly established legal right is a legal question.

Cooper v. Rogers

968 F. Supp. 2d 1121 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Sep 4, 2013

not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Thus, the Court elects to revisit its qualified immunity analysis. .

Tauvar v. Bar Harbor Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, Inc.

633 F. Supp. 741 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 26, 1986

The general rule of qualified immunity, set out in Harlow v. … This clearly buttresses the officer’s qualified immunity defense on the basis of good faith compliance with the law. Cf. Blackburn v.

Rivera v. Medina

963 F. Supp. 78 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Apr 29, 1997

Qualified Immunity As a final basis for his motion to dismiss, codefendant Toledo Davila argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitution rights of which a reasonable person