Case law

Todd v. Hicks

District Court, M.D. Alabama · Mar 6, 2023

Moreover, when the court discussed the “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity, it did not mention arguable probable cause and instead analyzed whether the plaintiff had a clearly established right to not be seized … Hicks asserts that the cases Todd cites in his qualified immunity argument are not sufficiently similar to this case to clearly establish the law governing this case.

Singletary v. District of Columbia

685 F. Supp. 2d 81 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 18, 2010

("Qualified immunity ... generally 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 … As qualified immunity is not at issue in this case, the District’s argument on this point is irrelevant. 6 .

Justus v. County of Buchanan

517 F. Supp. 2d 810 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Oct 10, 2007

Ill The defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity from the plaintiffs § 1983 claims. … If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.

Rourke v. United States

744 F. Supp. 100 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 17, 1989

In these motions to dismiss the complaint, the remaining individual defendants contend that they are absolutely immune from personal liability for the state law torts asserted in Counts I thru V and enjoy qualified immunity … Clearly, the same conduct which this Court concludes is discretionary for purposes of establishing immunity from state law tort claims will likewise be discretionary for purposes of determin *103 ing whether the United States

Lipsett v. University of Puerto Rico

745 F. Supp. 793 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Sep 24, 1990

The Supreme Court has used the principles of sovereign immunity to interpret this amendment to “establish that ‘an uncon-senting State is immune from suits brought in federal courts by her own citizens as well as by citizens … The exceptions to eleventh amendment immunity are well-established.

Africa v. City of Philadelphia

910 F. Supp. 212 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 13, 1995

This grant of summary judgment was based exclusively on the conclusion that Goode was entitled to qualified immunity. … The rulings merely grant Goode qualified immunity on the personal capacity claims, a decision that does not affect the City’s liability.

Bluitt v. Houston Independent School Dist.

236 F. Supp. 2d 703 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 14, 2002

A defendant "is entitled to qualified immunity unless he violated a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of his conduct." Blackwell v. … In considering a claim of qualified immunity, the court must make a two-step inquiry: First, the court must determine whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

BISBEE, BY BISBEE v. Reynard

29 F. Supp. 2d 498 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Apr 14, 1998

Furthermore, district courts cannot establish a constitutional right for the purpose of qualified immunity. Anderson v. Romero, 72 F.3d 518, 525 (7th Cir.1995). … . § 1983 , the arresting officers are immune from liability "if a reasonable police officer could have believed [the plaintiff's arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the arresting

Phillips v. Heydt

197 F. Supp. 2d 207 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 18, 2002

Mayor Heydt is not entitled to immunity Public officials may raise the affirmative defense of qualified immunity as a shield from liability for their official actions unless those actions violate “clearly established statutory … When analyzing a qualified immunity claim, a court must first identify the constitutional or statutory right at stake and then determine if that right was clearly established at the time the defendants violated those rights

Carter v. Jess

179 F. Supp. 2d 534 · District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 18, 2001

Government officials, including police officers, are entitled to qualified immunity for discretionary acts performed in connection with their public service, as long as they do not violate “clearly established” rights of … Even if the belief was mistaken, as long as it was reasonable and not in violation of clearly established law, the officer is entitled to immunity.

Briggs v. Oklahoma ex rel. Oklahoma Department of Human Services

472 F. Supp. 2d 1304 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 31, 2007

“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials ... from damages actions unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” Elder v. … Thus, these defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Holladay v. Roberts

425 F. Supp. 61 · District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Jan 6, 1977

To be entitled to Scheuer qualified immunity, an officer not only must have subjectively believed that his actions complained of were proper, but the actions also must have been reasonable in light of established constitutional … Clearly, the qualified good faith immunity provided by Scheuer and Wood provide no basis for dismissal of the complaint against defendants for the alleged seizure and forfeiture of plaintiff’s automobile pursuant to § 67-

Holmes v. City of Wilmington

249 F. Supp. 3d 781 · District Court, D. Delaware · Apr 19, 2017

B. § 1983 Fourth Amendment Claim Defendants argued that the officer defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiffs § 1983 Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims. … immunity argument.

Harris v. Noxubee Cnty.

350 F. Supp. 3d 592 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Oct 19, 2018

Due to the reasoning articulated above, the Court need not allow the motion for leave or address qualified immunity in this case. … that right was clearly established at the time of the defendant's alleged misconduct.").

Gonser v. Twiggs County

182 F. Supp. 2d 1253 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Jan 9, 2002

In Their Individual Capacities Qualified immunity protects government officials unless they violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Second, they are also entitled to qualified immunity.

Yanez v. City of New York

29 F. Supp. 2d 100 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 6, 1998

basis of qualified immunity. … Although a denial of immunity on a motion for summary judgment may be immediately appealable, pretrial resolution of the qualified immunity defense may be defeated by a factual dispute. Id.

Mohammed Ex Rel. Mohammed v. School District of Philadelphia

355 F. Supp. 2d 779 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 4, 2005

If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.” 50 Since the Court has already determined that the facts here … A.96-6039, 1997 WL 411205 , at *3 (E.D.Pa. *788 July 27, 1997) (“Public school officials are entitled to qualified immunity against constitutional claims when their conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or

Aristocrat Technologies, Inc. v. Light & Wonder, Inc.

District Court, D. Nevada · Jun 24, 2024

These examples go beyond the mere identification of a 24 system that may qualify for protection. … See InteliClear, 978 F.3d at 658 (explaining that a 25 plaintiff must “clearly refer to tangible trade secret material instead of referring to a system 1 which potentially qualifies for trade secret protection”).

Hardy v. City of New York

732 F. Supp. 2d 112 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 12, 2010

State defendants present similar arguments to City defendants, and add arguments that: (1) defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because Hardy’s claims do not touch upon clearly established federal rights; (2) Hardy … “Government actors are entitled to qualified immunity ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Okin v.

Pitner v. Murrin

812 F. Supp. 2d 661 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 2008

Qualiñed Immunity The principles governing claims of qualified immunity are well-established. … “Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, ‘government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory