Case law

Morris v. Crow

825 F. Supp. 295 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 23, 1993

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY In Harlow v. … While the Defendants argue that they are entitled to immunity, Plaintiff in the instant case has alleged that she was demoted in violation of clearly established First Amendment law.

Kirkham v. Whatcom County

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 9, 2025

Qualified Immunity 8 County Defendants also assert Plaintiff’s claim must be dismissed because they are 9 entitled to qualified immunity. … To begin, qualified immunity is a defense to liability only for 10 those sued in their individual capacities under § 1983.

Nocera v. New York City Fire Commissioner

921 F. Supp. 192 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 31, 1996

Even where the plaintiffs federal rights and the scope of the official’s permissible conduct are clearly established, the qualified immunity defense protects a government actor if it was “objectively reasonable” for him to … immunity because the law was clearly established, as the parties agree, that public employers must have reasonable suspicion before requiring an individualized drug test.

Barton v. City and County of Denver

432 F. Supp. 2d 1178 · District Court, D. Colorado · Jun 2, 2006

A law is “clearly established” for purposes of qualified immunity if there is a Supreme Court or Tenth Circuit decision on point, or if “the clearly established weight of authority from other circuits [has] found the law … However, the police officers are nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity if their conduct did not violate clearly established law. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201-202, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

Fedor v. Kudrak

421 F. Supp. 2d 473 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Mar 14, 2006

Qualified Immunity The defendants next claim that, even if Fedor’s right to equal protection was violated, they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity is warranted if either (1) the official’s actions did not violate clearly established law, or (2) even if the actions violated a clearly established law, the official was objectively reasonable in believing

Flanigan v. Town of Colchester

171 F. Supp. 2d 361 · District Court, D. Vermont · Oct 31, 2001

Qualified Immunity The privilege of qualified immunity protects law enforcement officers from facing suit, not merely liability. Saucier v. … The Supreme Court did not provide a clearly established rule in Graham. Id. at 2158.

Schwimmer v. Kaladjian

988 F. Supp. 631 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 9, 1997

Qualified immunity shields government officials whose “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … The Court-finds that Guilford is protected by qualified immunity.

Peters v. Moses

613 F. Supp. 1328 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · May 17, 1985

“Whether an official may prevail in his qualified immunity defense depends upon the ‘objective reasonableness of [his] conduct as measured by reference to clearly established law.’ ... … Davis, 104 S.Ct. at 3018 (emphasis added). 15 Applying this standard to the case at hand, I find that the Defendant Moses has successfully established a qualified immunity defense.

Baker v. City of Detroit

483 F. Supp. 919 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Sep 25, 1979

They further claim that a review of the pleadings establishes that defendants never asserted the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … These defenses clearly set forth legal *922 grounds for a claim of governmental immunity.

Harper v. Booth

382 F. Supp. 3d 124 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 23, 2019

Qualified Immunity Defendant contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity, which protects government officials from trial and monetary liability unless the pleaded facts establish that 1) the official violated a statutory … If the facts do not show a constitutional violation or that the right in question was not clearly established, the officer is immune. Marrero-Mendez v. Calixto-Rodriguez , 830 F.3d 38 , 43 (1st Cir. 2016).

Orso v. Cobb

348 F. Supp. 2d 1165 · District Court, D. Hawaii · Dec 15, 2004

Qualified Immunity Standard Public officials, including police officers, are entitled to qualified immunity for acts that do not violate “clearly established ... constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Because Orso’s constitutional rights were not violated, we do not proceed with an analysis of whether the right at issue was clearly established for the purpose of qualified immunity.

Griffin v. City of Chicago

406 F. Supp. 2d 938 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 13, 2005

Under qualified immunity, “ ‘public officials performing discretionary functions are protected against suits for damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Because qualified immunity is both an immunity from suit and a defense to liability, we should resolve the issue of qualified immunity “at the earliest possible stage in litigation.” Saucier v.

Mencias Avila v. District of Columbia

246 F. Supp. 3d 347 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2017

Qualified immunity Police officers are immune from suit where their actions did not violate clearly established law. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 243–44 (2009). … At the summary judgment stage on a claim of qualified immunity, the facts are viewed in the light most favorable to the party opposing qualified immunity—in this case, Plaintiff. Id.

Rosen v. County of Suffolk, NY

305 F. Supp. 2d 229 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 25, 2004

As noted supra, however, even assuming the Plaintiffs claims make out a Fourth Amendment violation, Defendant Schreiber and the officers are clearly entitled to qualified immunity. … Generally, public officials are entitled to qualified immunity if: “(1) their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe their acts did not

Trujillo v. Board of Education of the Albuquerque Public Schools

377 F. Supp. 2d 994 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Mar 30, 2005

LAW ON QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … SECOND PRONG OF THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY ANALYSIS: THE LAW MUST BE CLEARLY ESTABLISHED. Whether the law was clearly established at the time the claim arose is a legal issue for the court.

Rodrigues v. Village of Larchmont, New York

608 F. Supp. 467 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 7, 1985

Therefore, the court cannot grant summary judgment regarding the qualified immunity. 2. … This is clearly incorrect.

B Street Commons, Inc. v. Board of County Commissioners

835 F. Supp. 1266 · District Court, D. Colorado · May 27, 1993

The individual defendants are also entitled to qualified immunity. … In short, because the commissioners’ actions did not violate clearly-established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known, defendants in their personal capacities are protected by qualified immunity

DiFolco v. Roberts

585 F. Supp. 139 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Mar 14, 1984

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Although Roberts and McKenna Goldberg are not entitled to the absolute immunity defense of Imbler v. … The Court therefore finds that the rights at issue here were not “clearly established” within the meaning of Harlow and that defendants Roberts and McKenna Goldberg are entitled to the qualified immunity from monetary liability

Gray v. Hernandez

651 F. Supp. 2d 1167 · District Court, S.D. California · Aug 27, 2009

Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct did not violate any clearly-established right under the circumstances in which they acted. (Mot. at 14.) … See Pratt, 65 F.3d at 806 (“the prohibition against retaliatory punishment is ‘clearly established law’ in the Ninth Circuit, for qualified immunity purposes.”) (citing Schroeder v.

Mercer v. Dora B. Schriro, Comm'r of the Dep't of Emergency Servs. & Pub. Prot., the Conn. State Police Union, Inc.

337 F. Supp. 3d 109 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Aug 28, 2018

Under the qualified immunity doctrine, "government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … In general, to overcome the defense of qualified immunity, the right alleged to have been violated must be clearly established at a level of specificity such that "a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing