Case law

Rhodes-Courter Ex Rel. Courter v. Thompson

252 F. Supp. 2d 1359 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 20, 2003

Qualified Immunity Even though Plaintiff has stated a Section 1983 cause of action, Defendants would be entitled to have the Amended Complaint dismissed if they were entitled to qualified immunity. See Marsh v. … Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that in the posture of a motion to dismiss must clearly appear on the face of the complaint. See Powell v. Ga.

Bath Petroleum Storage, Inc. v. Sovas

136 F. Supp. 2d 52 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 21, 2001

Plaintiffs Fourth Cause of Action The affirmative defense of qualified immunity “shields public officials from liability for their discretionary acts that do ‘not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Defendant Pearson claims that because he is, in effect, a prosecutor, absolute immunity protects him from this claim. In the alternative, he argues that qualified immunity protects him from any liability for this claim.

Brandon v. Village of Maywood

157 F. Supp. 2d 917 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 3, 2001

Parker’s arrest, the officers may be entitled to qualified immunity if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Eversole v. … The existence of a clearly established right is purely a question of law, Apostol v.

Alla v. Verkay

979 F. Supp. 2d 349 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 30, 2013

Qualified Immunity Verkay argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity for his use of excessive force. He and Dorson both argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity for the second arrest. … Therefore, the Court will address the qualified immunity issue in that context. 1. Excessive Force (Verkay) Entitlement to qualified immunity presents a question of law. See Stephenson v.

Carr v. Montgomery County

59 F. Supp. 3d 787 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 6, 2014

If the allegations do not establish a violation of a constitutional right, the [official] is entitled to qualified immunity.... … The officer defendants assert qualified immunity to the claims against them. The district attorney defendants have asserted qualified immunity as to some claims and absolute immunity as to others.

Wootten v. Virginia

168 F. Supp. 3d 890 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Mar 10, 2016

. § 1983 (3) rejected Defendants’ qualified immunity defense, and (4) concluded liability against Defendants Holcomb and Hill was established on Plaintiffs supervisory liability claim. … But the January 7th opinion explained that Fourth Circuit precedent does require a case directly on point that finds a right clearly established in a “specific context.” (Dkt. 140 at 20 (quoting Meyers v.

Songer v. Bledsoe County Government

District Court, E.D. Tennessee · Aug 13, 2024

clearly established law. … clearly established law.

Schultzen v. Woodbury Central Community School District

250 F. Supp. 2d 1047 · District Court, N.D. Iowa · Feb 19, 2003

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 … established, Bumsted is entitled to qualified immunity.

Sclafani v. Spitzer

734 F. Supp. 2d 288 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 27, 2010

Qualified Prosecutors and police officers “performing discretionary functions generally are granted a qualified immunity and are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … Plaintiffs have failed to establish a “plus” factor.

Walker v. Jackson

56 F. Supp. 3d 89 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 31, 2014

Qualified immunity The genuine issue of material fact leads the Court to deny Officer Jackson’s contention that he is entitled to qualified immunity with respect to plaintiffs’ unreasonable search claim. … 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

Palmer v. BD. OF COM'RS FOR PAYNE COUNTY OKLAHOMA

765 F. Supp. 2d 1289 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 18, 2011

And, because Plaintiff has not established that Defendant Hall violated Plaintiffs clearly established constitutional rights within the two-year statutory period, Defendant Hall is entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs … Defendant Myers is not entitled to qualified immunity.

Getch v. Rosenbach

700 F. Supp. 1365 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 29, 1988

In so doing, Getch misconstrues the meaning of “clearly established rights.” … Conversely, an official’s subjective good faith no longer gives rise to a defense of qualified immunity if the court finds his conduct to be objectively unreasonable in that it violated clearly established law. Davis v.

Risica Ex Rel. Risica v. Dumas

466 F. Supp. 2d 434 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Nov 17, 2006

Qualified Immunity “The qualified immunity doctrine shields governmental officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Thus, defendant Dumas is also entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity if the constitutional violations alleged by the plaintiff were not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Neveu v. City of Fresno

392 F. Supp. 2d 1159 · District Court, E.D. California · Jul 15, 2005

Individuals are not immune under the doctrine of qualified immunity if they violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” 6 Harlow v. … “To determine whether qualified immunity is appropriate, a court must identify the specific right allegedly violated and determine whether that right was so clearly established as to alert a reasonable officer to its constitutional

Vila ex rel. estate of Vila v. Miami-Dade County

65 F. Supp. 3d 1371 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 25, 2014

However, the discretionary actions of police officers such as Officers Kelly and Guerra are immune from liability, “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Therefore, Plaintiff must “establish that qualified immunity is not appropriate” by satisfying a two-part inquiry. Id. First; Plaintiff must show that the officers violated Mr. Vila’s constitutional right.

El Ranchito, Inc. v. City of Harvey

207 F. Supp. 2d 814 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 26, 2002

To overcome a defense of qualified immunity, the plaintiff must first allege the deprivation of an actual constitutional right, and second, show that the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … In support of their claim of qualified immunity, defendants argue that the law was at least not clearly established that the police defendants could not make a protective sweep of El Ranchito to protect the inspector.

Al-Jundi v. Estate of Rockefeller

757 F. Supp. 206 · District Court, W.D. New York · Sep 4, 1990

Qualified immunity having been denied June 26, 1990 copies of such three defendants’ notices of appeal were received July 3rd. … As an important aside, what is established clearly by such assertion is that there is no prejudice to *210 any heir, grantee, legatee, devisee or any other type of distributee of defendant Mon-ahan because there is no detriment

Feathers v. Aey

196 F. Supp. 2d 530 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 27, 2002

State actors lose this immunity when they violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person should have known. … Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 (holding that *537 qualified immunity shields state actors only “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Bailey v. City of New York

79 F. Supp. 3d 424 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 15, 2015

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects federal and state officials from money damages and “unnecessary and burdensome discovery or trial proceedings.” Coollick v. … ’s actions were objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law.”

Ling v. Herrod

445 F. Supp. 2d 892 · District Court, W.D. Tennessee · Aug 3, 2006

Qualified Immunity Herrod has asserted the defense of qualified immunity. Unless there is a dispute about whether a defendant committed certain acts, qualified immunity is a question of law to be decided by the court. … Herrod contends, however, that he is entitled to qualified immunity because a reasonable official would not have understood that sending the letters violated Plaintiffs’ procedural due process rights.