Case law

Barrett v. Fields

924 F. Supp. 1063 · District Court, D. Kansas · Apr 16, 1996

Qualified Immunity Defendants individually assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiffs First Amendment retaliation claim. … Under the defense of qualified immunity, government officials performing discretionary functions will not be held liable for their conduct unless their actions violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Robinson v. City of Minneapolis

957 F. Supp. 2d 1094 · District Court, D. Minnesota · Jul 30, 2013

Qualified immunity generally Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity on Robinson’s claims. … “Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability ... unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional ... right of which a reasonable person would have known.” LaCross v.

Qvyjt v. Lin

953 F. Supp. 244 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 11, 1997

They further contend that, with respect to Count III, they áre entitled to qualified immunity, as it was not clearly established that professors at a public university violate a graduate student’s First Amendment rights when … ■Having concluded that plaintiff has rebutted the first prong of the qualified immunity defense, the court turns to the second prong — whether the constitutional standards were clearly .established at the time defendants

Bee v. DeKalb County

679 F. Supp. 1107 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Feb 23, 1988

Defendant Morton, in his individual capacity, moves for summary judgment in his favor on the ground of qualified immunity. … The Supreme Court has created a qualified immunity doctrine which protects government officials from suit. In Harlow v.

Kiper v. Louisiana State Board of Elementary & Secondary Education

592 F. Supp. 1343 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Aug 1, 1984

If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct. … In Trejo, supra, the Fifth Circuit applied a two-step analysis to the qualified immunity defense. The initial question required by the court in Trejo is: “Was the law clearly established at the time?

Trombley v. O'Neill

929 F. Supp. 2d 81 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 7, 2013

Qualified Immunity “Once qualified immunity is pleaded, plaintiffs complaint will be dismissed unless defendant’s alleged conduct, when committed, violated ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 190 , 104 S.Ct. 3012 , 82 L.Ed.2d 139 (1984) ("Even defendants who violate [clearly established] constitutional rights enjoy a qualified immunity that protects them from liability for damages unless

Murvin v. Jennings

259 F. Supp. 2d 180 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Mar 31, 2003

As a general rule, police officials are entitled to qualified immunity, and are not subject to personal liability for civil damages, if their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … City of Mount Vernon, 154 F.3d 269, 274 (5th Cir.1998) (employing a two-step analysis for determining whether police are entitled to qualified immunity: whether plaintiff alleged violation of a clearly established constitutional

Jones v. Westchester County Department of Corrections Medical Department

557 F. Supp. 2d 408 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 6, 2008

Qualified immunity Likewise, Defendants completely misplace their argument for qualified immunity- First, Defendants have violated my individual practices by raising this issue as part of a pre-answer motion to dismiss, and … (“Qualified Immunity: Special Rules”). “Failure to proceed in accordance with these rules constitutes a waiver of the right to move for judgment on the ground of qualified immunity prior to trial.” Id.

Pablo Hernandez v. City of Miami

302 F. Supp. 2d 1373 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 13, 2004

Is Officer Perez Entitled to Qualified Immunity? … address the use of deadly force on pretrial detainees, and law was therefore not clearly established); Montoute v.

Mata v. Anderson

685 F. Supp. 2d 1223 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Jan 13, 2010

Once the plaintiff has established the inference that the defendant’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right, a qualified immunity defense ordinarily fails. See Cannon v. … Once a plaintiff has established the inference that the defendant’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right, a qualified immunity defense ordinarily fails. See Cannon v.

Wolfe v. Routzahn

953 F. Supp. 2d 627 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 20, 2013

“Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably believe that their actions were lawful.” Henry v. … The qualified immunity analysis is a two-prong inquiry: first, the court asks whether a constitutional violation has occurred; and second, the court asks whether the right violated was clearly established. Id.

McCarthy v. Barrett

804 F. Supp. 2d 1126 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 26, 2011

Qualified Immunity Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity from damages for civil liability as long as their conduct does not *1144 violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … In analyzing a qualified immunity defense, the court must determine (1) what right has been violated, and (2) whether that right was “clearly established” at the time of the incident. Saucier v.

Pandolfi De Rinaldis v. Llavona

62 F. Supp. 2d 426 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Aug 16, 1999

Morales may avail herself of the doctrine of qualified immunity. … that the conduct alleged is a violation of ‘clearly established’ law.”

EJS PROPERTIES, LLC v. City of Toledo

651 F. Supp. 2d 743 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 27, 2009

Qualified Immunity McCloskey asserts qualified immunity in response to plaintiffs § 1983 claims. … “The third inquiry impacts the analysis when despite the violation of a clearly established constitutional right, the official’s conduct was objectively reasonable, and so should still enjoy qualified immunity.” Id. A.

Rodriguez v. City of Cleveland

619 F. Supp. 2d 461 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 1, 2009

An a matter of law, qualified immunity shields a state actor from civil damages in appropriate cases: Reliance on the objective reasonableness of an official’s conduct, as measured by reference to clearly established law, … action places it beyond the scope of a police officer’s qualified immunity if the right retaliated against was clearly established,” DeLoach v.

Key v. Grayson

163 F. Supp. 2d 697 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Sep 5, 2001

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Defendants next contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity because it is not clearly established that the ADA or the Rehab Act can be enforced against the States under the Eleventh Amendment. … Thus, the States lack of Eleventh Amendment immunity from claims under the Rehab Act was clearly established in 1996. Accordingly, Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity on this basis. 3.

Hussein v. City of Perrysburg

647 F. Supp. 2d 838 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 10, 2009

Qualified Immunity The Husseins sue Thielen and Klag in their individual capacity, and as such, the defendants may be entitled to qualified immunity. … Based on the following, I find the two constitutional violations in issue to be clearly established such that Thielen and Klag are not entitled to qualified immunity- *857 With regard to the Husseins’ procedural due process

Bacon v. Taylor

414 F. Supp. 2d 475 · District Court, D. Delaware · Feb 7, 2006

Qualified Immunity A public official is entitled to qualified immunity if the official’s “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … If not, the inquiry ends, and the officer is entitled to qualified immunity. Id.

Southerland v. Woo

44 F. Supp. 3d 264 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 10, 2014

Qualified Immunity A. … Qualified immunity applies if a government officer’s “action was ‘objectively legally reasonable in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.’ ” Taravella v.

Hamilton v. City of Jackson

508 F. Supp. 2d 1045 · District Court, S.D. Alabama · Jun 13, 2007

“Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … “The threshold inquiry a court must undertake in a qualified immunity analysis is whether the plaintiffs allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation.” Hope v.