Case law

Harper v. Mancos School District Re-6

837 F. Supp. 2d 1211 · District Court, D. Colorado · Aug 5, 2011

“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 qualified immunity claims, a court must consider two elements: whether a constitutional violation occurred, and whether the violated right was “clearly established” at the time of the violation.

Epps v. Gray

62 F. Supp. 3d 77 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 31, 2014

Mem. at 8-9, they assert qualified immunity as a defense, id. at 9. … And it is presumed that these rights were clearly established on August 12, 2011.

Beall v. Leavitt, et al.

District Court, D. New Hampshire · Aug 31, 1999

Section 1983 and Qualified Immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that, "qovernment officials performinq discretionary functions, qenerally are shielded from liability for civil damaqes insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Williams v. Payne

73 F. Supp. 2d 785 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Nov 3, 1999

The first step in determining whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity is to determine whether the alleged acts violated clearly established law. See id. … Since qualified immunity provides immunity from suit in federal court, “a party may immediately appeal a district court’s denial of qualified immunity.” Blake, 179 F.3d at 1007 (citing Behrens v.

Davis v. Township of Paulsboro

421 F. Supp. 2d 835 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 27, 2006

Many cases have stated that an individual government official is entitled to qualified immunity if the right alleged to have been violated was "not clearly established.” See, e.g., McKee v. … Thus, the language "clearly established right," when applied in this type of case, risks the undesirable and incongruous result that qualified immunity will be denied to most, if not all, law enforcement officers because

Witter v. Pennsylvania National Guard

462 F. Supp. 299 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 14, 1978

Nothing in this chapter shall excuse noncompliance with any statute or ordinance of a State or political subdivision thereof establishing greater or additional rights or protections than the rights and protections established … Furthermore, the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity, as defined in Edelman v.

Sivard v. Pulaski County

809 F. Supp. 631 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 30, 1992

Under qualified immunity, however, government officials generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … The Coleman court held that the sheriff was entitled to qualified immunity because the sheriff’s conduct did not violate a clearly established constitutional right. Coleman v. Frantz, 754 F.2d at 730-31 .

Carroll v. City of Mount Vernon

707 F. Supp. 2d 449 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 26, 2010

Plaintiffs Equal Protection Claim against Defendant Davis also fails because Defendant Davis is entitled to qualified immunity. … clearly established at the time it was taken.”

Adamian v. University of Nevada

359 F. Supp. 825 · District Court, D. Nevada · Apr 16, 1973

the defense of qualified governmental immunity. … Every circuit, except possibly the Ninth, has adopted the good faith test for qualified governmental immunity.

Hodsdon v. Town of Greenville

52 F. Supp. 2d 117 · District Court, D. Maine · May 6, 1999

violates the Fourth Amendment by increasing the likelihood that deadly force will become necessary was not clearly established”). i. … The Court need not reach the issue of qualified immunity raised by Defendants with respect to this claim because Plaintiff has failed to establish a Fourth Amendment violation based on the absence of probable cause.

Warren v. Swanson

69 F. Supp. 2d 1047 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 4, 1999

to qualified immunity. … The" plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the constitutional right allegedly violated was clearly established “before the defendant acted or failed to act.” Id.

Courtney v. Godinez

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Feb 5, 2024

Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (“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 … not violated clearly established law.”

Teamsters Loc. U. No. 822 v. City of Portsmouth, Va.

423 F. Supp. 954 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Aug 11, 1975

“It is the existence of reasonable grounds for the belief formed at the time and in light of all the circumstances, coupled with good-faith belief, that affords a basis for qualified immunity of executive officers for acts … A compensatory award will be appropriate only if the school board member has acted with such an impermissible motivation or with such disregard of the student’s clearly established constitutional rights that his action cannot

Morrison v. Stepanski

839 F. Supp. 1130 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 3, 1993

and Stepanski assert that ■they are entitled to qualified immunity from civil damages under Harlow v. … As the proponent of qualified immunity, defendants bear the burden of establishing that it applies to them. Stoneking, supra, 882 F.2d at 726 .

Calef v. Budden

361 F. Supp. 2d 493 · District Court, D. South Carolina · Mar 18, 2005

In analyzing a qualified immunity defense to a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim, if the plaintiff can establish the violation of a constitutional right, the next step is to determine whether the contours of the right were clearly established … Because the court had been “called upon in [that] case to strike a difficult balance between important, competing interests,” the plaintiffs alleged constitutional rights were not “clearly established” and qualified immunity

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

595 F. Supp. 2d 492 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 4, 2009

Qualified Immunity for Warden Juel Cole in his individual capacity; 4. … Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that “government officials performing discretionary functions ... are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly

Jones v. Wichita State University

528 F. Supp. 2d 1182 · District Court, D. Kansas · Dec 20, 2007

The Supreme Court has established a two-part approach to determine if qualified immunity applies. … Dotson asserts that Jones cannot establish that he deprived her of a constitutional right, and that he is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. A.

Brammer-Hoelter v. Twin Peaks Charter Academy

575 F. Supp. 2d 1219 · District Court, D. Colorado · Aug 25, 2008

Marlatt — Qualified Immunity. … Marlatt is “clearly established.”

Wilkinson v. Lewis

289 F. Supp. 3d 371 · District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 5, 2018

Qualified Immunity Defendants "are entitled to qualified immunity if they can establish either that (1) a constitutional right was not violated or (2) the right was not clearly established." Royal Crown Day Care LLC v. … immunity as a matter of law. 3 Though unclear whether defendants seek qualified immunity with respect to the excessive force claim, "[s]ince the law in this area is well-established, in Fourth Amendment unreasonable force

Washington v. Garcia

977 F. Supp. 1067 · District Court, S.D. California · Sep 10, 1997

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY An officer is entitled to qualified immunity so long as his or her actions do not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … The qualified immunity standard requires a two-step analysis: (1) Was the law governing *1074 the official’s conduct clearly established?