Case law

Mills v. Steger

179 F. Supp. 2d 637 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Jan 9, 2002

In determining whether a government official is entitled to qualified immunity, the court must “(1) identify the right allegedly violated, (2) determine whether the constitutional right violated was clearly established at … he was violating the clearly established right.

Ryan v. City of Detroit

977 F. Supp. 2d 738 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Oct 9, 2013

Accordingly, Plaintiff requests that the Court deny the officers qualified immunity for her equal protection claims. Id. Despite Falk and Schultz pleading qualified immunity in their answer, Defs.’ … When presented with a similar situation, the Sixth Circuit has stated that the failure to properly and timely present qualified immunity constitutes waiver of the defense: We need not address [the defendants’ qualified immunity

Abdus-Samad v. Greiner

158 F. Supp. 2d 307 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 13, 2001

The doctrine of qualified immunity protects Government officials from suits against them for money damages where “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Where a right is clearly established, “the defendants may nonetheless establish immunity by showing that reasonable persons in their position would not have understood that their conduct was within the scope of the established

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

Freece v. Clackamas County

442 F. Supp. 2d 1080 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 25, 2006

The next question is whether the right was clearly established. … “Whether a right is ‘clearly established’ for purposes of qualified immunity is an inquiry that must be undertaken in light of the specific context of the case, not as a broad general proposition.”

Allah v. Poole

506 F. Supp. 2d 174 · District Court, W.D. New York · Aug 14, 2007

When the events giving rise to this claim occurred, then, the right asserted here was not clearly established, and defendants are therefore immune from liability for damages on this claim. … Defendants do not appear to raise a qualified-immunity defense as to this claim, but in any event I find that Keefe is not entitled to qualified immunity.

Jardin De Las Catalinas Ltd. Partnership v. Joyner

861 F. Supp. 2d 12 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · May 21, 2012

Upon plaintiffs Las Catalinas and Santa Maria having been unable to establish a violation of a constitutional right, it is further averred the defendant Executive Director of PRHFA would be entitled to qualified immunity … However, defendant George Joyner, Executive Director of PRHFA, was only sued in his official capacity for which qualified immunity would not be applicable since qualified immunity confers immunity only from individual capacity

Audio Odyssey, Ltd. v. Brenton First National Bank

284 F. Supp. 2d 1159 · District Court, S.D. Iowa · Sep 22, 2003

In arriving at that decision, the court concluded “the law governing excessive force claims was clearly established at the time of the arrest,” and for Fourth Amendment purposes, “ ‘the qualified immunity inquiry is the same … If the law was clearly established, the “second step is to determine if a reasonable officer could have believed, in fight of the clearly established law, that his conduct was lawful.” Id.

Cochran v. City of Atlanta

150 F. Supp. 3d 1305 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Dec 16, 2015

Legal Standard “Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions frorq-suits in their individual, capacities unless their -conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional … In Cook , the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of qualified immunity. 414 F.3d at 1315 .

Smith v. United States

896 F. Supp. 1183 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 17, 1995

Qualified Immunity Procknow and Goodwill have urged that they be accorded qualified immunity from suit in this case. … "Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from civil trials ... and from liability if their conduct violates no `clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

Miracle ex rel. Miracle v. Spooner

978 F. Supp. 1161 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Sep 26, 1997

Qualified Immunity. … It has been clearly established since at least 1987, when the Eleventh Circuit decided Taylor v.

Eric Taylor v. The City of Manchester, et al.

2012 DNH 193 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Nov 20, 2012

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 or constitutional … the right was ‘clearly established’ at the 9 time of the defendant’s alleged violation”.

Robinson v. TRIPLER ARMY MEDICAL CENTER

683 F. Supp. 2d 1097 · District Court, D. Hawaii · Dec 16, 2009

Qualified Immunity The Ninth Circuit reversed this Court’s determination that Plourde was entitled to qualified immunity and remanded Plaintiffs’ § 1983 claim alleging that Plourde unconstitutionally removed Kewai from Plaintiffs … Constitutional Violation Once it has been established that the defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity, a court may turn to the merits of the case. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 202-06, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

Jemaneh v. University of Wyoming

82 F. Supp. 3d 1281 · District Court, D. Colorado · Mar 11, 2015

“The doctrine of 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 … To resolve a claim of qualified immunity, the Court must consider two elements: (1) whether a constitutional violation occurred, and (2) whether the right violated was “clearly established” at the time of the violation.

Santistevan v. City of Colorado Springs

983 F. Supp. 2d 1295 · District Court, D. Colorado · Feb 5, 2013

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects from litigation a public official whose possible *1311 violation of a plaintiffs civil rights was not clearly a violation at the time of the official’s actions. … DISCUSSION All Defendants remaining in this case assert an entitlement to qualified immunity.

Rouse v. Nielson

851 F. Supp. 717 · District Court, D. South Carolina · Mar 18, 1994

The Fourth Circuit, recently summarized the law of qualified immunity: Qualified immunity shields a governmental official from liability for civil monetary damages if the officer's "conduct does not violate clearly established … Under the facts of this case, defendant is clearly entitled to qualified immunity. IV.

Fillmore v. Ordonez

829 F. Supp. 1544 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jul 29, 1993

Once the plaintiff has done so, the defendant assumes the normal burden of a movant for summary judgment of establishing that no material facts remain in dispute that would defeat his claim of qualified immunity. Id. … Since plaintiff has not established that his right to a substitute diet was clearly established in this circuit, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiffs claim that they unduly delayed providing the plaintiff

George v. Board of Education

34 F. Supp. 3d 442 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 23, 2014

“The doctrine of 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 … Second, was that right “clearly established”? Id. Qualified immunity applies to O.G.’s federal and state constitutional claims. See Sussino v.

Watkins v. Roche

560 F. Supp. 416 · District Court, S.D. Georgia · Mar 17, 1983

GOOD FAITH Defendants second argument centers on the qualified immunity or “good faith” defense. … Strickland standard on the scope of the qualified immunity defense.

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