Case law

Hall v. Louisiana

12 F. Supp. 3d 878 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Mar 31, 2014

Qualified Immunity In support of their motion, Jindal and Caldwell argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity protects government officials sued in their individual capacities “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

Herbal Sensations, Inc. v. Rivera

270 F. Supp. 2d 234 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jun 30, 2003

The Court concludes that absolute immunity does not extend to these particular defendants’ actions. They may, however, be entitled to qualified immunity. III. … Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right which

Dobson v. City and County of Denver

81 F. Supp. 2d 1080 · District Court, D. Colorado · Oct 26, 1999

Qualified immunity shields public officials from civil damages liability if their actions did not “ ‘violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Pino v. … then addresses whether that right was clearly established at the relevant time.

M.H. Ex Rel. H. v. Bristol Board of Education

169 F. Supp. 2d 21 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Aug 29, 2001

Whether a defendant is entitled to a defense of qualified immunity “turns on the ‘objective reasonableness’ of the actions, assessed in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.” … With respect to the plaintiffs causes of action for violations of the IDEA, the court concludes that the individual defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity because the law was clearly established that each child

Thornton v. City of Montgomery, Ala.

78 F. Supp. 2d 1218 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Aug 31, 1999

Where the law that the defendants allegedly violated was not clearly established at the time of the alleged offense, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. See id. at 807 , 102 S.Ct. at 2732 . … Georgia Military College, 147 F.3d 1337 , 1343 n. 14 (11th Cir.1998), clung to the approach that a court may pass directly to the "clearly established" prong of the qualified immunity determination without first pausing to

Strawser v. Strange

100 F. Supp. 3d 1276 · District Court, S.D. Alabama · Apr 23, 2015

D.Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity insulates government actors, in their individual capacities, from civil lawsuits as long as the challenged discretionary conduct does not violate clearly established federal statutory … Thus, qualified immunity does not apply. E.

Sanders v. Lockyer

365 F. Supp. 2d 1093 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 28, 2005

immunity does not apply, California’s Qualifying Act and Contraband Amendment are not preempted by federal antitrust law. … See PTI, 100 F.Supp.2d at 1193 (“the private defendants are clearly immune for their activities involved with the negotiation, execution, and attempts to implement the MSA, the Qualifying Statute, and the Model Act”); Forces

Shaddy v. Gunter

690 F. Supp. 860 · District Court, D. Nebraska · Aug 8, 1988

In any event, all the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for their part in the events that constitute the basis of this action. The Supreme Court in Anderson v. … of the action, ... assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.

David v. Village of Oak Lawn

954 F. Supp. 1241 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 30, 1996

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity for section 1983 liability, “public officials performing discretionary functions are protected against suits for damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory … The Seventh Circuit has established a two-part test for a ruling on qualified immunity: (1) whether the conduct sets out a constitutional violation; and (2) whether the constitutional standards were clearly established at

Gary v. City of North Chicago

160 F. Supp. 3d 1035 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 1, 2016

When a plaintiff shows that excessive force was used against him, to overcome an asserted defense of qualified immunity the plaintiff must further establish “that it was objectively unreasonable for the officer to believe … A constitutional right is “clearly established” for the purpose of qualified immunity where “[t]he contours of the right [are] sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates

Sanders v. Jefferson County Department of Human Resources

117 F. Supp. 2d 1199 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Nov 5, 1999

To qualify for protection under this, doctrine and therefore be shielded from liability for civil damages, government officials must show their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Accordingly, whether Pritchett and Simmons are entitled to qualified immunity for their decisions in Plaintiffs case is a question of whether the law was clearly established at the time their decision was made.

Walsh v. Finn

865 F. Supp. 126 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 22, 1994

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, public officials are not held liable for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable official … Defendant had previously asserted the defense of qualified immunity on the grounds that it was not clearly established that an inmate had a right not to be confined to keeplock pending his administrative appeal of a disciplinary

Warr v. Liberatore

270 F. Supp. 3d 637 · District Court, W.D. New York · Sep 5, 2017

entitled to qualified immunity and, accordingly, summary judgment is warranted. … A police officer is entitled to qualified immunity from liability for his discretionary actions if either (1) his conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Tinius v. Carroll County Sheriff Department

321 F. Supp. 2d 1064 · District Court, N.D. Iowa · Jun 14, 2004

Applicable standards “Qualified immunity shields governmental officials from personal liability if their actions, even if unlawful, were ‘nevertheless objectively reasonable in light of the clearly established law at the … “In determining if [defendants] are entitled to qualified immunity [courts] must ask whether [the plaintiffs] stat[e] a violation of a constitutional right, and whether that right was clearly established at the time, such

Black Hawk v. Pennsylvania

225 F. Supp. 2d 465 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 25, 2002

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials “performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Where the defense of qualified immunity is asserted, the plaintiff shoulders the initial burden of showing that the challenged conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. Sherwood v.

Davis v. Hill

173 F. Supp. 2d 1136 · District Court, D. Kansas · Nov 15, 2001

Qualified Immunity Generally, public officials performing discretionary functions enjoy qualified immunity from personal liability under § 1983 “unless their conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional … On a motion for summary judgment based on a defense of qualified immunity, the relevant question is whether a reasonable official could have believed his actions were lawful in light of clearly established law and the information

Polion v. City of Greensboro

26 F. Supp. 3d 1197 · District Court, S.D. Alabama · Jun 10, 2014

Qualified immunity. Hudson’s primary focus is on qualified immunity. (Doc. 35 at 11-13). … The plaintiffs only argument against qualified immunity is the unhelpful observation that “it is clearly established that a public employer may not retaliate against an employee for an employee’s exercise of constitutionally

M.S. ex rel. Soltys v. Seminole County School Board

636 F. Supp. 2d 1317 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 10, 2009

duties have the benefit of qualified immunity when sued in their individual capacities so long as their conduct does not violate any clearly established statutory or constitutional rights known to a reasonable person. … Whether the Law Was Clearly Established The right to be free from excessive and arbitrary corporal punishment in a school context is clearly established under the precedent of the U.S.

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.

Adams v. Township of Champion, Ohio

68 F. Supp. 2d 906 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 21, 1999

Government officials are generally entitled to qualified immunity when performing discretionary functions as long as the conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … In order to assert a violation of a “clearly established” right and defeat a qualified immunity defense “[t]he contours of a right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing