Case law

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.

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-

Cuba-Diaz v. Town of Windham

274 F. Supp. 2d 221 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Aug 1, 2003

Qualified Immunity on § 1983 Claim 9 “Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Connecticut law also provides qualified immunity, but, only where probable cause exists. See Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52-557n(b)(5).

Gonzales v. Galveston Independent School District

865 F. Supp. 1241 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 4, 1994

Qualified Immunity The individual Defendants in this case argue that they should not be subjected to suit in their individual capacities because they are protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity. … from suit in their individual capacities under the doctrine of qualified immunity.

Luder v. Endicott

86 F. Supp. 2d 854 · District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Feb 14, 2000

Ex parte Young Exception Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 , 28 S.Ct. 441 , 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908), established an additional exception to sovereign immunity that allows a court to order prospective injunctive relief to restrain … See Pennhurst, 465 U.S. at 98 , 104 S.Ct. 900 (principle of sovereign immunity is constitutional limitation of federal judicial power established in Art. III). C.

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.

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.

Shaffer v. City of Hampton, Va.

780 F. Supp. 342 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Nov 13, 1991

Boyden, 241 Va. 125 , 400 S.E.2d 184, 187 (1991) (Virginia Beach police officer in vehicular pursuit had qualified immunity based on four-part test). … This qualified immunity does not protect Defendants against gross negligence.

Bull v. City and County of San Francisco

758 F. Supp. 2d 925 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 16, 2010

Defendant Hennessey took an interlocutory appeal on the qualified immunity issue, and the Ninth Circuit concluded that the City’s “policy requiring strip searches of all arrestees classified for custodial *928 housing in … Moreover, Plaintiffs could even have sought to add representatives as to the section 4030 claim while the matter was on interlocutory appeal as to qualified immunity. See Alice L. v.

Jarvis v. Roberts

489 F. Supp. 924 · District Court, W.D. Texas · May 15, 1980

In Butz , the Court held that judges have absolute immunity in the exercise of their judicial functions, that federal prosecutors also have absolute immunity, and that federal executive officials have a qualified immunity … Agent McConnell, as a federal executive officer, is entitled to a mixture of absolute and qualified immunity.

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

Connelly v. Comptroller of the Currency

673 F. Supp. 1419 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 15, 1987

Defendants deny these allegations, and alternatively claim qualified and absolute immunity. IV. … While officers of a governmental agency who perform judicial or prosecutorial functions may have absolute immunity, all other officers have only qualified immunity. Butz v.

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.

Meyers v. Logan Memorial Hospital

82 F. Supp. 2d 707 · District Court, W.D. Kentucky · Jan 27, 2000

Instead, “the ultimate test for determining whether defendants are entitled to a grant of qualified immunity under the HCQIA is whether the hospital procedures met the standards set forth in the statute.” … The “HCQIA clearly grants broad discretion to hospital boards with regard to staff privileges decisions.

Stella v. Dept. Of Educ.

367 F. Supp. 3d 235 · District Court, D. Delaware · Mar 18, 2019

Qualified Immunity The Individual Defendants separately argue that, as governmental employees, they are entitled to qualified immunity from Stella's First Amendment claim. 176 Qualified immunity " 'shield[s] [government actors … inquiries in either order and "may grant qualified immunity on the ground that a purported right was not 'clearly established' by prior case law, without resolving the often more difficult question whether the purported

Hunter v. Etowah Cnty. Court Referral Program, LLC

309 F. Supp. 3d 1154 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Mar 30, 2018

"The defense of qualified immunity completely protects government officials performing discretionary functions from suit in their individual capacities unless their conduct violates 'clearly established statutory or constitutional … More specifically, the law was not clearly established that Ms.

American Telecom Co. v. the Republic of Lebanon

408 F. Supp. 2d 409 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Sep 9, 2005

The TIP established the guidelines for all bid applicants. … facie case is established, the burden of production shifts to the non-movant to show that an exception applies, [citation omitted] Nevertheless, the party claiming FSIA immunity retains the ultimate burden of persuasion