Case law

Jenkins v. District of Columbia

4 F. Supp. 3d 137 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 18, 2013

Qualified immunity shields government officials from suit relating to the performance of their discretionary functions unless an official’s conduct violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Coley’s arguments for qualified immunity, they will be denied. Her argument that she is entitled to qualified immunity for the assault at the police cruiser will be denied.

Oxborrow v. City of Coalinga

559 F. Supp. 2d 1072 · District Court, E.D. California · May 29, 2008

“In order to be entitled to qualified immunity, the officers must show that their discretionary conduct did not violate any clearly established rights of which a reasonable person should have known.” Penilla v. … “[Qualified immunity shields agents ... if ‘a reasonable officer could have believed [the action] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the [arresting] officers possessed.’ ” Hunter v.

Bonds v. Fizer

713 F. Supp. 2d 752 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 20, 2010

If an officer can establish “arguable probable cause” to arrest the plaintiff, then he is entitled to qualified immunity. Williams, 269 F.3d at 781 . … “A plaintiff seeking to defeat the assertion of qualified immunity must establish that the law concerning the plaintiffs asserted right was clearly established at the time the challenged conduct occurred.” Kog er v.

Tafler v. District of Columbia

539 F. Supp. 2d 385 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 2008

Qualified immunity “shields state officials from liability for their discretionary functions ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … The Court now turns to whether the right alleged to have been violated was clearly established.

Montano-Perez v. Durrett Cheese Sales, Inc.

666 F. Supp. 2d 894 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Oct 13, 2009

Next, the County Defendants argue that any such rights under the NLRA are not “clearly established,” and, therefore, the County Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … Also, again, the County Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. The law that no individual may be arrested without probable cause is clearly established.

Castro v. Melchor

760 F. Supp. 2d 970 · District Court, D. Hawaii · Jan 7, 2011

Further, even if Plaintiff could otherwise establish a medical negligence claim, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … An official is entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 if the official “ ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Spoklie v.

Tenorio v. Harris

370 F. Supp. 3d 863 · District Court, E.D. Illinois · Mar 27, 2019

Qualified Immunity In arguing for summary judgment, the Defendants did not rely on qualified immunity. … Police officers "are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time."

Patrick v. City of Overland Park, Kan.

937 F. Supp. 1491 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jun 21, 1996

Thus defendant is entitled to qualified immunity if plaintiff fails to show that the law was clearly established. See, e.g., Pallottino v. … investigation for his name and address); Medina, 960 F.2d at 1498 (defendant entitled to qualified immunity because plaintiff failed to show it was clearly established that recklessness could give rise to liability under

Jackson v. City of Brooklyn Center

District Court, D. Minnesota · Mar 6, 2023

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects government officers from § 1983 liability “unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory … Schmidli, who was attempting to comply with officer’s commands when he was tackled. 4 F.4th 648, 653–54 (8th Cir. 2021) (reversing district court’s application of qualified immunity and finding it was clearly established

Malec v. Sanford

191 F.R.D. 581 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 7, 2000

The Board-defendants now renew their request for legislative and qualified immunity. … In fact, the defendants wrongly place the burden on Malee to establish that they are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Frary v. County of Marin

81 F. Supp. 3d 811 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 25, 2015

“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 a reasonable person … As it is “clearly established that officers [can] not intentionally deny or delay access to medical care,” Clement, 298 F.3d at 906 , Nurse Fetterly is not presently entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.

Doe v. Board of Education of Consolidated School District 230

18 F. Supp. 2d 954 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 29, 1998

The individual defendants also argue that they are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity. … Because that would violate clearly established law, defendants would not be entitled to qualified immunity. See Stoneking, 882 F.2d at 720 .

Bailey v. Pataki

636 F. Supp. 2d 288 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 10, 2009

still entitled to qualified immunity. … that defendants are entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law.

Mann v. Palmerton Area School District

33 F. Supp. 3d 530 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 2014

State actors sued in their individual capacity under § 1983 are entitled to qualified immunity “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … In determining whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, a court considers whether the official’s acts violated a constitutional or statutory right and (if so) whether that right was clearly established at the

Baxter v. Fulton-DeKalb Hospital Authority

764 F. Supp. 1510 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Mar 29, 1991

A defendant can avail himself of a qualified immunity defense as to his personal liability only if the plaintiff fails to demonstrate that defendant’s conduct violated clearly established constitutional rights of which a … Eleventh amendment immunity does not bar plaintiff’s claim. Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity because they violated plaintiff’s clearly established constitutional rights.

Navas Chabran v. Santiago Nieves

666 F. Supp. 16 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jul 24, 1987

Qualified Immunity In actions brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , a defense of qualified immunity from liability for damages is available to state executive officers performing discretionary functions, “insofar as their conduct … does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Perreault v. Thornton

781 F. Supp. 873 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Dec 6, 1991

In essence, an award of qualified immunity disposes of the case. Standard for Qualified Immunity Harlow v. … Because a police officer is expected to know the law, the inquiry is “nothing more than an examination whether the events at issue violated ‘clearly established ... constitutional rights.’ ” In the area of qualified immunity

Rosen v. Chang

811 F. Supp. 754 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Jan 12, 1993

I will now consider these standards in the context of the summary judgment motion premised on the qualified immunity defense. B. Dr. William Chang — Qualified Immunity Buenrostro v. … Chang from raising the shield of qualified immunity. C. Nurse Cleo Dardeen — Qualified Immunity As with Dr.

Martin v. County of San Diego

650 F. Supp. 2d 1094 · District Court, S.D. California · Oct 23, 2009

at issue was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged misconduct. … Maus’ qualified immunity argument.

Rankin v. Berkeley County Sheriff's Department

222 F. Supp. 2d 802 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Sep 19, 2002

Even though a prosecutor has absolute immunity for a decision not to prosecute, qualified immunity exists for a decision not to investigate. 14 In this matter, Games-Neely has qualified immunity for not investigating the … The Court, therefore, finds that plaintiffs claims against Lynn Nelson are barred by his absolute and qualified immunity and his Motion to Dismiss should be Granted. 16 Berkeley County Commission The Fourth Circuit has established