Case law

Ying Li v. City of New York

246 F. Supp. 3d 578 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 31, 2017

“Qualified immunity shields law enforcement officers from § 1983 claims for money damages provided that their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have been … In short, “[e]ven if the right at issue was clearly established in certain respects, ... an officer is still entitled to qualified immunity if ‘officers of reasonable competence could disagree’ on the legality of the action

Brickell v. Clinton County Prison Board

658 F. Supp. 2d 621 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 10, 2009

Defendants’ Entitlement to Qualified Immunity Saucier v. Katz has mandated a two-step analysis concerning qualified immunity. … Defendants claim that they are entitled to qualified immunity, as they did “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

Chiriboga v. Saldana

660 F. Supp. 618 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Apr 29, 1987

Defense of Qualified Immunity In actions brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , a qualified immunity from liability for damages is available to state executive officers performing discretionary functions, “insofar as their conduct … We find the defendants established a valid defense of qualified immunity in that it was not clearly established that Dr. Chiriboga had tenure, or a constitutionally recognized property interest in continued employment.

Wise v. New York City Police Department

928 F. Supp. 355 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 12, 1996

“clearly established” statutory or constitutional rights. … their acts did not violate clearly established rights.

Strachan v. City of Federal Heights, Colo.

837 F. Supp. 1086 · District Court, D. Colorado · Nov 17, 1993

The individual municipal defendants contend that they are protected by qualified immunity which shields government officials from civil liability provided their alleged conduct does not violate clearly established law of … . *1091 As a result, Officer Vallero has the burden of establishing that no material facts remain in dispute that would defeat his claim of qualified immunity. Id.; see also Powell v.

Haywood v. Nye

999 F. Supp. 1451 · District Court, D. Utah · Mar 24, 1998

Nye’s claim of absolute immunity is denied. VIII. Qualified Immunity. … Therefore, Nye may not have qualified immunity for her violation of clearly established law unless she can show extraordinary circumstances which would nevertheless make her actions objectively reasonable.

Blake v. Race

487 F. Supp. 2d 187 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 29, 2007

In addition, Race is not entitled to qualified immunity on this claim on summary judgment. A theory of supervisory liability was clearly established at the time of the events underlying this case, see Meriwether v. … Defendants also argue that police officers’ Brady obligations were not clearly established in 1990, entitling defendants to qualified immunity.

Dyer v. Fyall

322 F. Supp. 3d 725 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 6, 2018

But police officers have qualified immunity, which shields them from liability unless they violate clearly established law. Harlow v. Fitzgerald , 457 U.S. 800 , 818, 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) ; Toney v. … The officers in this case have qualified immunity, which means the Dyers can hold them liable for violations of only clearly established rights.

Bloomingburg Jewish Education Center v. Village of Bloomingburg

111 F. Supp. 3d 459 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 9, 2015

Herrmann also argues that he is not alleged to have violated a clearly established federal right, and therefore the claims against him should be dismissed under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Thus, Herrmann is not alleged to have violated a clearly established federal right, and he is therefore entitled to qualified immunity from suit.

Auvaa v. City of Taylorsville

506 F. Supp. 2d 903 · District Court, D. Utah · Mar 27, 2007

Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials ... from damage actions unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” Elder v. … clearly established at the time of the conduct at issue.

Wright v. City of Salisbury, Mo.

656 F. Supp. 2d 1013 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Sep 10, 2009

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 … a constitutional right; and (2) whether the right was "clearly established."

Klayman v. Obama

125 F. Supp. 3d 67 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 21, 2015

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields “government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … In evaluating a qualified immunity defense, the court must determine whether plaintiff has alleged the violation of such a right, and whether the right was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged misconduct.

Flood v. Lane

638 F. Supp. 677 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 10, 1986

All defendants are entitled to qualified good-faith immunity because they did not violate any “clearly established” constitutional rights. 3. Klincar is absolutely immune from suit. 4. … Immunity from Damages All defendants next seek insulation from damage liability under the rule of qualified immunity enunciated in Harlow v.

Menebhi v. Mattos

183 F. Supp. 2d 490 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Feb 11, 2002

not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … of qualified immunity.

Robinson v. United States Bureau of Prisons

244 F. Supp. 2d 57 · District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 7, 2003

[Gjovernment officials performing discretionary functions generally are granted a qualified immunity and are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity if either (a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant to believe that his action did not violate

Pinkney v. Clay County

635 F. Supp. 1079 · District Court, D. Minnesota · Apr 11, 1986

Defendant Johnson asserts that none of these allegations should defeat his absolute or qualified immunity. Unlike prosecutors, social workers do not enjoy absolute immunity. Scott County, 618 F.Supp. at 1565 ; Doe v. … The burden is on the defendant to show that he did not violate such clearly established rights. Green v. White, 693 F.2d 45 (8th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 462 U.S. 1111 , 103 S.Ct. 2464 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1341 (1983).

Hermes v. Hein

479 F. Supp. 820 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 16, 1979

Qualified Immunity of the Individual Defendants. The court must also deny the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint against the individual defendants. … Defendants contend that they are protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity. Under the qualified immunity doctrine, Procunier v. Navarette, 434 U.S. 555 , 98 S.Ct. 855 , 55 L.Ed.2d 24 (1978) and Wood v.

Smith v. Cochran

216 F. Supp. 2d 1286 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 9, 2001

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials performing discretionary functions from § 1983 liability for civil damages if their actions do not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional … Thus, Cochran is not entitled to summary judgment on his qualified immunity defense because Smith has alleged facts sufficient to show that Cochran violated clearly established federal law such that a reasonable government

Selkirk v. Boyle

738 F. Supp. 70 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 23, 1990

Qualified Immunity Civil Damages As a threshold matter the Court notes that qualified immunity is an issue only if the jury finds that Selkirk’s termination was politically motivated. … The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability for discretionary acts performed in their official capacity so long as their actions did not violate clearly established statutory

Croom v. Balkwill

672 F. Supp. 2d 1280 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 18, 2009

Plaintiff alleges that these constitutional rights to which she was deprived were clearly established, and, therefore, Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. Id. I. … If no constitutional violation is established, then no further inquiries regarding qualified immunity are needed. Id.