Case law

Kinsey v. City of Opp, Ala.

50 F. Supp. 2d 1232 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · May 19, 1999

Qualified immunity protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” Malley v. … This evidences a finding that no clearly established constitutional right was violated. See Dowdell v.

Laurie Ortolano v. P City of Nashua, et al.

2025 DNH 022 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Feb 25, 2025

Even if Ortolano Had Produced Sufficient Evidence on her Retaliation Claim Against Detective Lombardi, He Would Be Entitled to Qualified Immunity Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials … Ortolano identifies neither binding authority nor “a robust consensus of persuasive authority” that Detective Lombardi’s conduct violated clearly established law.

Vs Ex Rel. TS v. Muhammad

581 F. Supp. 2d 365 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2008

The claim of qualified immunity on all federal claims Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages when "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … If the case were limited to these facts, the City defendants would seem to have a strong case for qualified immunity under the clearly established and clearly deferential standard of the Second Circuit.

Marshall v. Reno

915 F. Supp. 426 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 1, 1996

Still, the Court is unable to exercise jurisdiction over the nonresident defendants, the defendant fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … The defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from claims against them in their individual capacities because the plaintiff fails to establish that he had a clearly established right to be transferred, deported, or placed

Stafford v. Goff

609 F. Supp. 820 · District Court, D. Colorado · May 25, 1985

(Defendant who otherwise passes the Harlow qualified immunity test regarding clearly settled constitutional law does not lose qualified immunity for violating clearly settled state law.) … Therefore, Goff and Arbuthnot are protected by qualified immunity. The alleged violation of a state statute does not abrogate this immunity. Davis .

R.W. v. Board of Regents of University System of Georgia

114 F. Supp. 3d 1260 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Feb 27, 2015

Plaintiff disputes the necessity of proving a separate constitutional violation to abrogate immunity and instead' argues that Eleventh Circuit precedent establishes that a separate constitutional violation is not also required … Florida Bd. of Regents, 528 U.S. 62, 78 , 120 S.Ct. 631 , 145 L.Ed.2d 522 (2000). *1280 As to the first factor establishing Con-' gressional intent to abrogate immunity, the ADA explicitly states that “[a] State shall not

Liff v. Office of the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Labor

156 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 8, 2016

Qualified Immunity Defendants also move to dismiss on grounds of qualified immunity, which “protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … In pleading qualified immunity, Defendants argue primarily that “Liff has not alleged the deprivation of a clearly established constitutional right” because “the Complaint at best raises a garden-variety tort claim for

Turner v. Virginia Department of Medical Assistance Services

230 F. Supp. 3d 498 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Feb 14, 2017

In turn, this begs the question: What qualifies as “the state?” To answer this question, the Supreme Court developed a two-part test to determine whether certain quasi-agencies qualified for state-action immunity. … The state-action immunity analysis presents three questions: (1) was DMAS acting with “clearly articulated” state policy in directing DentaQuest to terminate its agreement with Plaintiff; (2) if yes, does DMAS qualify for

Williams v. Brantley

492 F. Supp. 925 · District Court, W.D. New York · Jun 25, 1980

As made clear in defendant Brantley’s memorandum of law, he intends to invoke the defense of absolute or qualified immunity for federal officers. … At best, the decision may raise certain issues which must be confronted if Brantley’s absolute or qualified immunity defense is to be ultimately successful.

Williams v. Klien

20 F. Supp. 3d 1171 · District Court, D. Colorado · Feb 24, 2014

Qualified Immunity Finally, Captain Klien argues he is entitled to qualified immunity concerning the First Amendment claim of Mr. Williams. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability for civil damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Anderson-Free v. Steptoe

970 F. Supp. 945 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Feb 27, 1997

The relevant inquiry in qualified immunity analysis is “fact specific,” Rodgers v. … to a defense of qualified immunity.

Hancock v. City of Greenwood

942 F. Supp. 2d 624 · District Court, N.D. Mississippi · May 1, 2013

Qualified immunity shields a governmental official from civil liability for damages based upon the performance of discretionary functions if the official’s acts did not violate clearly established constitutional or statutory … If the plaintiff fails to state a constitutional claim or if the defendant’s conduct was objectively reasonable under clearly established law, then the governmental official is entitled to qualified immunity. Id.

Yaldo v. Wayne State University

266 F. Supp. 3d 988 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Jun 8, 2017

The Supreme Court has stated that, “the clearly established law must be ‘particularized’ to the facts of the case,” because “[otherwise, ‘plaintiffs would be able to convert the rule of qualified immunity ... into a rule … Even if Plaintiff had established that Defendants violated his federal rights, Defendants would be entitled to qualified immunity.

Neinast v. Board of Trustees of the Columbus Metropolitan Library

190 F. Supp. 2d 1040 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 27, 2002

Defendants’ Qualified Immunity Defense Defendants Black and Johnson argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … The affirmative defense of qualified, or good faith, immunity shields “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

DESFOSSES v. Keller

667 F. Supp. 2d 1210 · District Court, D. Idaho · Sep 22, 2009

Defendant also argues that her status as a public official bars Plaintiffs action the grounds of qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity It is well settled that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

Telepo v. Palmer Township

40 F. Supp. 2d 596 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 1999

applicability of qualified immunity is well-settled: Government officials performing discretionary functions are “shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Under this test, in section 1983 actions, particularly those involving the Fourth Amendment, qualified immunity decisions require the Court to determine the currently applicable law, and whether that law was clearly established

Parker v. Brown

706 F. Supp. 2d 125 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 19, 2010

“Qualified immunity ... generally shields [governmental] officials from liability for their discretionary functions ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.”

Gill v. Kovach

729 F. Supp. 2d 925 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 27, 2010

Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that protects government officials performing discretionary functions from civil suits if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Metiva, 31 F.3d 375, 387 (6th Cir.1994), the Court cannot determine, as a matter of law, that qualified immunity does not attach.

Graham v. City of New York

128 F. Supp. 3d 681 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 10, 2015

A police officer is entitled to qualified immunity from suit brought pursuant to Section 1983 if either “(1) his conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … July 25, 2007) (noting that "the right not to be arrested without probable cause was clearly established at the time of the incident in question"). .

De La Cruz Andreu v. Inclan

671 F. Supp. 109 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Aug 17, 1987

Qualified Immunity In actions brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , a defense of qualified immunity from liability for damages is available to state executive officers performing discretionary functions, “insofar as their conduct … does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”