Case law

Howington v. Eiffe

180 F. Supp. 3d 199 · District Court, N.D. New York · Apr 15, 2016

Qualified Immunity Defendants next argue that, even if Plaintiff has evidence of excessive force, they are entitled to qualified immunity. … “Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

Watson v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 19, 2024

Mot. at 6 n.5, arguing only that Director Faust is not entitled to qualified immunity. … Escorsio, 764 F.3d 102, 111 (1st Cir. 2014) (refusing, at the summary judgment stage, to grant qualified immunity to officers based on defendants’ concession that “clearly established law” required officers to take “some

Hron v. Jenkins

15 F. Supp. 2d 1082 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jul 30, 1998

If plaintiff meets his initial burden, defendants then assume the summary judgment burden of establishing that there are no disputed material facts that would defeat their claim for qualified immunity. Woodward v. … Defendants are thus entitled to qualified immunity against plaintiffs claim for damages, and entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Fairchild, Arabatzis & Smith, Inc. v. Sackheim

451 F. Supp. 1189 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 27, 1978

Even if damages potentially were available, however, we conclude that the agents are entitled to assert, as they have done, a defense of qualified, official immunity. See Wood v. … United States Department of Agriculture, supra, 535 F.2d 688 , and that they have established an uncontested factual basis for their claim of immunity.

Walthour v. Miller

795 F. Supp. 2d 317 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 10, 2011

The law regarding qualified immunity is well-established. As the Third Circuit stated in Lamont v. … Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity on the Fourth Amendment claim. V. CONCLUSION Plaintiff has not established any genuine issues of material fact.

Angara v. City of Chicago

897 F. Supp. 355 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 20, 1995

Qualified immunity shields public officials from liability to the extent their conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. Biddle v. … The Seventh Circuit has set out the following two-step inquiry to determine if qualified immunity applies: First, the plaintiff must show that the law was clearly established when the challenged conduct occurred.

Maryland Savings-Share Insurance Corp. v. United States

308 F. Supp. 761 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 22, 1970

MSSIC also cites intergovernmental tax immunity cases to establish that MSSIC’s activity is an essential governmental function. … The exemption carried forward, however, was qualified by adding a cutoff date of September 1, 1951. Insurers not organized before that date did not qualify for the exemption.

Carroll v. Village of Shelton

973 F. Supp. 900 · District Court, D. Nebraska · Dec 19, 1996

Immunity The defendants in their individual capacities argue that they are entitled to summary judgment on plaintiffs section 1983 claims on the basis of qualified immunity. … In order to determine whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity the court must determine (1) whether plaintiff has asserted the violation of a constitutional right, (2) whether this constitutional right was clearly

Diamond v. Chulay

811 F. Supp. 1321 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 26, 1993

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages when they perform discretionary functions, unless their acts violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Qualified immunity is appropriate here because the position that Diamond held is not clearly established as one requiring protection from a termination based on political reasons.

Cavazos v. Edgewood Independent School District

400 F. Supp. 2d 948 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Aug 3, 2005

Even if the government official’s conduct violates a clearly established right, the official is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct was objectively reasonable. Id. … Qualified Immunity Plaintiffs’ allegation, even if assumed to be true, do not establish a violation of a clearly established right against Defendants.

Fritz v. Brown and Daly

2007 DNH 104 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Aug 29, 2007

Alternatively, they argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Are Defendants Entitled to Qualified Immunity?

Adoption Services of Connecticut, Inc. v. Ragaglia

178 F. Supp. 2d 139 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Dec 17, 2001

A plaintiff may overcome the defendant’s qualified immunity “by showing that [the plaintiffs asserted] rights were clearly established at the time of the conduct at issue,” Davis v. … immunity defense, and the defendant is entitled to the defense of qualified immunity as a matter of law. 2. • Objectively Reasonable Action Even assuming defendant Schultz violated a clearly established federal right of

Johnson v. Meachum

839 F. Supp. 953 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Dec 15, 1993

Finally, the defendants assert that they are all shielded by their qualified, good faith immunity. … Generally, government, officials performing discretionary functions are accorded qualified immumty and thereby sMelded from civil damages liability insofar as they do not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Cornett v. Longois

871 F. Supp. 918 · District Court, E.D. Texas · Dec 8, 1994

The doctrine of qualified immunity affords protection against individual liability for civil damages to officials “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Qualified immunity protects a police officer from liability if a reasonable competent law enforcement officer would not have known that his actions violated clearly established law. Anderson v.

Medina Díaz v. González Rivera

371 F. Supp. 2d 77 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · May 25, 2005

Qualified Immunity. The appearing co-Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … The judge-made test to determine if a public official is entitled to the qualified immunity defense is comprised of three parts: “(1) whether plaintiffs allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation; (2) whether

Eaton v. Hancock County

741 F. Supp. 2d 307 · District Court, D. Maine · Sep 28, 2010

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 would have … Qualified Immunity as to Unreasonable Seizure The Magistrate Judge determined that Deputy Lepper is not entitled to qualified immunity on the unreasonable seizure claim because [i]t was clearly established long before 2006

Harrison v. Coffman

35 F. Supp. 2d 722 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 25, 1999

The qualified immunity issue asserted by defendants in their individual capacities is somewhat more difficult to decide. … This ruling is not, however, necessarily dispositive when the facts are more clearly developed, if a motion for summary judgment should be filed to avoid damages by asserting qualified immunity.

Tellier v. Scott

49 F. Supp. 2d 607 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 26, 1998

Fourth, they consider the Report’s rejection of their qualified immunity defense erroneous because plaintiff fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right. … Lastly, defendants contend that Judge Bernikow’s rejection of their qualified immunity defense was erroneous, insofar as he held that “plaintiffs claim asserted a ‘clearly established’ constitutional right with ‘sufficiently

Montoya v. Board of County Commissioners

506 F. Supp. 2d 434 · District Court, D. Colorado · Mar 14, 2007

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from individual liability when they are performing discretionary functions that do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … or statutory right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Kosegarten v. Department of Prosecuting Attorney

892 F. Supp. 2d 1245 · District Court, D. Hawaii · Aug 31, 2012

The majority of the arguments in the Immunity Opposition address discovery related to the qualified immunity issue. … Entitlement to Qualified Immunity Defendants also argue that this Court should conclude, as a matter of law, that Defendants Acob and Tate are entitled to qualified immunity. 1.