Case law

Rodriguez v. Rutter

498 F. Supp. 2d 932 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Jul 19, 2007

Because Plaintiff has not established that Defendants violated his First Amendment rights, he has failed to demonstrate that qualified immunity does not apply. … Because Plaintiff has not established that Defendants violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights, Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that qualified immunity does not apply.

Collins v. Scott

961 F. Supp. 1009 · District Court, E.D. Texas · Apr 18, 1997

The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established rights which a reasonable person … The Defendants are entitled to have the claims against them dismissed because of qualified immunity.

Cichocki v. Massachusetts Bay Community College

199 F. Supp. 3d 431 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 8, 2016

As detailed herein, it is well-established that enactment of the MTCA does not constitute a waiver of immunity, and, therefore, the motion to dismiss will be allowed as to Counts I and II. … Assuming, arguendo, that as the plaintiffs contend the defendants are being sued in their individual capacities, they may be entitled to qualified immunity. However, the defendants do not address this issue.

Cooney v. Casady

652 F. Supp. 2d 948 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 11, 2009

Absolute and Qualified Immunity Only defendant Casady asserts the defenses of absolute, or, in the alternative, qualified immunity. … Clearly she has.

Messina v. Mazzeo

854 F. Supp. 116 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 24, 1994

Qualified immunity grants an official an entitlement not to stand trial or face the other burdens of litigation so long as the official did not violate clearly established federal law. Mitchell v. … to qualified immunity.”).

Zappa v. Cruz

30 F. Supp. 2d 123 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Nov 23, 1998

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability for money damages when their conduct does not violate ‘clearly established’ statutory authority or … Defendants assert that they are protected from liability by qualified immunity because the federal law they violated was not clearly established.

Jefferson v. City of Hazlehurst

936 F. Supp. 382 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Dec 29, 1995

Dallas, 940 F.2d 925 , 942 (5th Cir.1991) (reversing summary judgment that denied qualified immunity defense where plaintiffs failed to state a constitutional violation); White v. … Taylor, 959 F.2d 539, 545 (5th Cir.1992) (in a 1983 action, the court must determine whether the contours of the plaintiff’s rights are clearly established).

Gonsalves v. Cleveland

980 F. Supp. 2d 1060 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 30, 2013

But unless police officers have violated “ ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights,’ ” they enjoy qualified immunity from any suit for civil damages for their official conduct. Pearson v. … In analyzing qualified immunity, courts may assess first the occurrence of a statutory or constitutional violation, and then whether the right involved was clearly established, as was mandated by Saucier v.

Bray Ex Rel. Bray v. Hobart City School Corp.

818 F. Supp. 1226 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Apr 9, 1993

Qualified immunity may be granted to a governmental official who was performing a discretionary function and whose conduct did not violate clearly established federal statutory or constitutional rights which a reasonable … Therefore, since the state administrative scheme did not clearly violate an established federal right, Owens is entitled to qualified immunity.

Holman v. Williams

436 F. Supp. 2d 68 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 30, 2006

Mayor Williams also is immune from personal liability for alleged violations of plaintiffs right to due process by the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity “shields State officials from liability for their discretionary functions ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

Westfahl v. District of Columbia

75 F. Supp. 3d 365 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 12, 2014

Less clear is whether Officer Thau’s decision to strike Westfahl with his baton is protected by qualified immunity. … Thus, Sergeant Mack is entitled to qualified immunity as well.

Short v. Greene

577 F. Supp. 2d 790 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 22, 2008

Qualified Immunity and Cruel and Unusual Punishment When a defendant asserts the defense of qualified immunity, the court must employ the two step analysis set forth by the Supreme Court in Saucier v. … If the answer to that question is “yes,” the second question is whether the right was clearly established at the time of the events at issue. Qualified immunity is ordinarily resolved at the summary judgment stage.

Procknow v. Curry

26 F. Supp. 3d 875 · District Court, D. Minnesota · Jun 18, 2014

Qualified immunity standards “Qualified immunity shields [a] government official ] from liability ... unless the *886 official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional ... right of which a reasonable person … (denying qualified immunity to officer who, according to the plaintiff, kicked him after he had fled but then surrendered).

Karns v. Dix

394 F. Supp. 2d 1102 · District Court, D. South Dakota · Feb 1, 2005

Internal Revenue Service, 67 F.Supp.2d 1189, 1196 (D.Nev.1999) (finding agents would be allowed qualified immunity in similar circumstances). … To avoid qualified immunity, a defendant must have violated a clearly established constitutional right in a manner where it was clear the official would understand his actions violated the rights.

Kelsey-Andrews v. City of Philadelphia

713 F. Supp. 760 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 16, 1989

Qualified Immunity In support of their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, defendants’ argue that Liciardello and Doyle are entitled to qualified immunity as police supervisors. … Prockop, 682 F.Supp. 247, 254-55 (D.N.J.1987) (public official not entitled to qualified immunity for alleged acts of sexual harassment occurring in 1983; contours of the law of § 1983 sexual harassment were clearly established

Cellini v. City of Sterling Heights

856 F. Supp. 1215 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Jun 30, 1994

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, such an official will not be found personally liable for money damages unless the official’s actions violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Here, the conduct complained of does not meet the objective “clearly estab *1223 lished law” test for avoiding qualified immunity.

Thomas v. Ford Motor Co.

137 F. Supp. 2d 575 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 11, 2001

If it applies, it protects absolutely, making the speaker “wholly immune” from liability. Id.; see also Peterson v. … (stating that the privilege makes statements “absolutely immune from liability”); Ruberton v.

Salts v. Moore

107 F. Supp. 2d 732 · District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Jun 27, 2000

The first step in the inquiry of a defendant’s claim of qualified immunity is whether the plaintiffs have alleged the violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Siegert v. … Alternatively, Defendants contend that even if Plaintiffs could establish a claim under § 1983, they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Maruska v. United States

77 F. Supp. 2d 1035 · District Court, D. Minnesota · Aug 2, 1999

Ultimately, when the sovereign consents to be sued, the terms of the waiver of sovereign immunity establish the parameters of the Court’s jurisdiction. Hercules, Inc. v. … As the Regulations provide, even if the grounds for a refund are clearly articulated, a tax return can only qualify as a refund claim if the return is “properly executed.” Treas. Reg. (26 G.F.R.) § 801.6402S(a)(5).

C.B. v. Sonora School District

819 F. Supp. 2d 1032 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 30, 2011

Qualified immunity shields 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 would have known … immunity analysis is whether the right was “clearly established” on the date of the incident.