Case law

Ortiz v. Voinovich

211 F. Supp. 2d 917 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 29, 2002

Government officials performing discretionary functions are afforded a qualified immunity under 42 U.S.C. §. 1983 as long as their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … When a defendant moves for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, the plaintiff must (1) identify a clearly established right alleged to have been violated; and (2) establish that a reasonable officer in the defendant

Stack v. Perez

248 F. Supp. 2d 106 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Feb 26, 2003

Finally, Perez is not entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law. … The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that “government officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Dailey v. Lyles

785 F. Supp. 812 · District Court, W.D. Missouri · Feb 28, 1992

Lyles, a state Conservation agent, is shielded from liability in this case by qualified immunity so long as he did not violate one of Dailey’s clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … effect the arrest violated a clearly established constitutional right.

Ospina v. Department of Corrections

769 F. Supp. 154 · District Court, D. Delaware · Aug 14, 1991

Ospina, however, asserts that the discrete task of handcuffing is so routine that it is “clearly” ministerial, and that qualified immunity cannot apply. We disagree. … If the law violated was clearly established, “the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent official should know the law governing his conduct.” Id.

Bame v. Clark

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 25, 2009

immunity because the law was not clearly established at the time of the alleged constitutional violation in September 2002. … Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability to the extent their alleged misconduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Carroll v. City of Westminster

52 F. Supp. 2d 546 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 22, 1999

Nonetheless 33 , the Court has undertaken the qualified immunity analysis. … Therefore, Defendants did not violate a eleariy established right and would be entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs § 1983 claims. B.

Navab-Safavi v. Broadcasting Board of Governors

650 F. Supp. 2d 40 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 3, 2009

If the alleged conduct does not violate such a clearly established right, qualified immunity applies. Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 640 , 107 S.Ct. 3034 , 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987). … As explained herein, the Court finds that plaintiff has stated violations of clearly established rights under the First and Fifth Amendments, and therefore, defendants are not shielded by the doctrine of qualified immunity

Bills v. Williams

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 3, 2025

unreasonable in the light of that then clearly established law.” … “Unless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” Mitchell v.

Richard v. City of Harahan

6 F. Supp. 2d 565 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Jun 30, 1998

Qualified Immunity Government officials who perform discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity shielding them from individual liability as long as their actions do not violate clearly established statutory … Mark’s consent was clearly not voluntary, especially in light of his attorney’s subsequent demand that the police leave the premises. Accordingly, the court finds that Kuhn is not entitled to qualified immunity. B.

Panzardi-Santiago v. University of Puerto Rico

200 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Mar 19, 2002

Defendants claim that although the ADA clearly abrogates Eleventh Amendment immunity for state governments, said action exceeded Congress’ abrogation powers. … In order to establish a prima facie case under Title II of the ADA, a plaintiff must show that (1) she is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) she was either excluded from participation in or denied the benefits

Smith v. Lanier

779 F. Supp. 2d 79 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 27, 2011

To determine whether qualified immunity applies, the Court asks (1) whether plaintiffs’ allegations, if taken as true, show that the defendants’ conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) whether that right was “clearly … Defendants have not argued that the constitutional right at issue is not clearly established.

Bevan v. Smartt

316 F. Supp. 2d 1153 · District Court, D. Utah · Apr 9, 2004

Immunity Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from suit arising from the performance of discretionary functions unless their actions violate a constitutional right and that right was clearly established at the time … their actions were unconstitutional, is fatal to a claim of qualified immunity.

Hill v. Clayton County Georgia

District Court, N.D. Georgia · Dec 9, 2022

established law and is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. … “Generally speaking, it is proper to grant a motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds when the complaint fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.”

Devlin v. Smalley

4 F. Supp. 2d 1315 · District Court, D. Utah · May 18, 1998

The presence or absence of qualified immunity is a question of law. Langley v. Adams County, 987 F.2d 1473, 1476 (10th Cir.1993). … was clearly established at the time of the conduct at issue.

Howard v. North Mississippi Medical Center

939 F. Supp. 505 · District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Sep 5, 1996

Even assuming, however, that Howard met the ADA definition of disabled, she could not establish an ADA violation. In regard to her dismissal as a health care provider, Howard was not qualified to do the job. … Howard claims she was qualified for the positions, including the two in which she was denied interviews. The Medical Center argues that “more” qualified individuals were hired into the positions.

Trujillo v. BD. OF EDUC. OF ALBUQUERQUE PUB. SCH.

377 F. Supp. 2d 994 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Mar 30, 2005

LAW ON QUALIFIED IMMUNITY 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 … SECOND PRONG OF THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY ANALYSIS: THE LAW MUST BE CLEARLY ESTABLISHED. Whether the law was clearly established at the time the claim arose is a legal issue for the court.

Allen v. Cooper

244 F. Supp. 3d 525 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 23, 2017

These individual defendants have raised additional defenses of legislative and qualified immunity. … However, “the Court does not believe that qualified immunity applies to the individual defendants as a matter of law because the law of [copyright] infringement is clearly established, relegating the application of such immunity

McCartney v. Barg

643 F. Supp. 1181 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 3, 1986

First, the Supreme Court’s decision in Youngberg which clearly established the rights at issue herein was published on June 18, 1982. … Since the law giving rise to the rights at issue here was clearly established when some or all of the operative events occurred herein, and the complaint alleges violations of these rights, the good faith immunity defense

Robinson v. St. Tammany Parish Public School System

983 F. Supp. 2d 835 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Oct 18, 2013

Darouse is Not Entitled to Qualified Immunity. … Robinson argues that Darouse cannot be entitled to qualified immunity because a reasonable person in his position “would have known — and should have known— that he was in stark violation of clearly established law.” 32 Specifically

Davis v. Kelly

981 F. Supp. 178 · District Court, W.D. New York · Aug 7, 1997

Qualified Immunity. Defendant contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Government officials performing discretionary functions in the course of their duties are immune from suits alleging constitutional violations “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional