Case law

Newkirk v. Allen

552 F. Supp. 8 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 29, 1982

It is well established, however, that the scope of the coverage of the immunity doctrine is not so limited. Id. at 573 , 79 S.Ct. at 1340 . … Economou, 438 U.S. 478 , 98 S.Ct. 2894 , 57 L.Ed.2d 895 (1978), the Court held that federal officials enjoy only a qualified immunity from liability for constitutional torts. Id. at 485 , 98 S.Ct. at 2899-2900.

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).

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.").

Aragón v. De Baca County Sheriff's Department

93 F. Supp. 3d 1283 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Mar 23, 2015

, and whether the right at issue was clearly established at *1288 the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.”) … immunity.

Morgan v. United States Parole Commission

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 4, 2016

Morgan has not identified any other applicable waiver of the sovereign immunity bar, and thus he has clearly failed to carry his burden of establishing that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over his claims for … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 819 (1982) (qualified immunity protects only those officials who have acted in an objectively reasonable manner).

Whittaker v. Munoz

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 4, 2019

The doctrine of qualified immunity entitles officers to immunity from suit unless their conduct violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … If the right in question was not clearly established, a court need not “broach the question of whether a constitutional violation occurred because the officers are entitled to qualified immunity regardless.”

Briley v. City of Trenton

164 F.R.D. 26 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 6, 1995

The court in that case concluded that Leatherman should not apply to actions against individual officers in light of their entitlement to a defense of qualified immunity. … While the complaint in this case does not allege a Bivens cause of action, officials sued in § 1983 actions are equally entitled to assert a qualified immunity defense. See Harlow v.

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.

Riggan v. Midland Independent School District

86 F. Supp. 2d 647 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Feb 23, 2000

H.Qualified Immunity As a final basis for summary judgment, the Defendants assert they are entitled to qualified immunity from Plaintiffs claims. … Defendant Neil Richmond also claims that he is entitled to summary judgment on all claims based on the doctrine of qualified immunity because he asserts he did not violate a clearly established right of which a reasonable

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.

Chase v. Baskerville

508 F. Supp. 2d 492 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Aug 2, 2007

The United States asserts that Virginia's waiver of sovereign immunity for Rehabilitation Act claims is firmly established. See Constantine v. … The foregoing statute "clearly and unambiguously conditions the receipt of federal funds on a waiver of State sovereign immunity" for Rehabilitation Act claims. Madison v.

M.K. Ex Rel. Mrs. K. v. Sergi

554 F. Supp. 2d 175 · District Court, D. Connecticut · May 12, 2008

was violating clearly established law. … K. filed this lawsuit, assuming the evidence supports these claims, defendants would not be entitled to qualified immunity, for plaintiffs’ right to access to the courts is clearly established.

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.

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

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.