Case law

Waybright Ex Rel. Waybright v. Frederick County Maryland Department of Fire & Rescue Services

475 F. Supp. 2d 542 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 1, 2007

Qualified Immunity. Coombe asserts the defense of qualified immunity with respect to Plaintiffs’ federal constitutional claims. … Assuming arguendo that Officer Coombe’s actions violated Waybright’s substantive due process rights, this Court would consider the second step of the qualified immunity analysis, i.e., were those rights "clearly established

Abreu v. New Mexico Children, Youth & Families Department

797 F. Supp. 2d 1199 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Jun 16, 2011

The Court will grant summary judgment on the Plaintiffs’ procedural due-process claims against Defendant Dorian Dodson and Defendant Sandra Perez on the grounds of qualified immunity, because there is no clearly established … Once the plaintiff has established the inference that the defendant’s conduct violated *1240 a clearly established constitutional right, a qualified immunity defense generally fails. See Cannon v.

Nat'l Ass'n of the Deaf v. Harvard Univ.

377 F. Supp. 3d 49 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 2019

Section 104.4 prohibits federal fund recipients from denying qualified handicapped persons the opportunity to participate in or benefit from provided aids, benefits, or services; ... and [from] providing qualified handicapped … ,' and (2) 'suffice to establish the affirmative defense with certitude.' " Gray v.

Puskas v. Delaware County, Ohio

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 24, 2022

An official is entitled to the defense of qualified immunity so long as he has not violated a “clearly established statutory or constitutional right[] of which a reasonable person would have known.” Mullenix v. … Puskas’s death and, therefore, they are not entitled to qualified immunity. (See, Resp., PageID 1069, 1075.)

Berg v. Kelly

343 F. Supp. 3d 419 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Nov 30, 2018

Finally, Judge Griesa held that the defendant officers "failed to show that they are entitled to qualified immunity." Id. The defendants filed a notice of appeal challenging the denial of qualified immunity. … The Second Circuit's decision discussed plaintiffs' constitutional claims at length and concluded that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on these claims. See Berg v.

Turner v. Maschner

777 F. Supp. 875 · District Court, D. Kansas · Oct 2, 1991

Defendants have filed an answer in which they deny any wrongdoing and raise the affirmative defenses of sovereign immunity for all allegations against them in their official capacities, and qualified immunity for all allegations … Clearly, the regulation forbids plaintiff from using deception to cause a school to give up possession of a directory where, absent the deception, possession would have been retained.

Grenning v. Stout

144 F. Supp. 3d 1241 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 3, 2015

As the Magistrate Judge correctly held, prison officials carrying out their duties are immune from suit unless their behavior contravenes “clearly established federal law.” Torres v. … claims was clearly established at the time Defendants’ relevant actions occurred.

Lanier-Finn v. Department of the Army

963 F. Supp. 2d 476 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 26, 2013

Adopting such an approach would clearly bar Plaintiffs claims in this case. However, the facts in Soble are distinguishable. … Plaintiffs claims clearly would be barred under the Green approach.

Ballard v. Johns

17 F. Supp. 3d 511 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 27, 2014

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.”

Hunt v. Central Consolidated School District

951 F. Supp. 2d 1136 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Jun 12, 2013

The defense of qualified immunity “protects a government official from personal liability and the burden of having to go to trial unless he violated clearly established ... constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … To defeat the defense of qualified immunity, the Plaintiffs must show the Defendants’ alleged actions (i) “violated a constitutional or statutory right” and (ii) the right the defendants violated was “clearly established

Midland Psychiatric Associates, Inc. v. United States

969 F. Supp. 543 · District Court, W.D. Missouri · Jul 8, 1997

The Bodimetric court interpreted this caution to mean that “Congress clearly expressed its intent not to alter the substantive scope of section 405(h). … “Although it is true that Ringer is not seeking the immediate payment of benefits, he is clearly seeking to establish a right to future payments should he ultimately decide to proceed with BCBR surgery.”

Clay v. Yates

809 F. Supp. 417 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Dec 15, 1992

A prosecutor who is engaged in a function “intimately associat *422 ed with the judicial phase of the criminal process,” id., is afforded absolute immunity, rather than qualified (or “good faith”) immunity. … In at least one prior action, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit sustained dismissal of the double jeopardy claims here advanced. 11 Furthermore, three of the defendants clearly are immune from suit

GUNASEKERA v. Irwin

774 F. Supp. 2d 882 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 28, 2011

claims for equitable relief were also barred by qualified immunity. … established for purposes of qualified immunity could not be decided on the undeveloped factual record that existed at the time.

Stanley v. United States

574 F. Supp. 474 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Oct 28, 1983

While sovereign immunity has constitutional underpinnings and is as absolute as Congress may intend, official immunity is judge-made and generally is qualified. 26 *485 In order to avoid obscuring the concepts of sovereign … The Court reasons that if the Feres doctrine applies, then military officers may be subject to qualified immunity from suit.

Katz v. McVeigh

931 F. Supp. 2d 311 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Mar 15, 2013

therefore barred by qualified immunity as well. … “Qualified immunity shields ... state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a constitutional or statutory right and (2) that the right was clearly established

Standt v. City of New York

153 F. Supp. 2d 417 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 19, 2001

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity insulates a police officer from liability for civil rights violations committed in the course of duty if (1) the officer believed in good faith that his conduct was lawful; and (2) it … Although courts should rule on qualified immunity defenses “early in the proceedings so that the costs and expenses of trial are avoided where the defense is dispositive,” Saucier, 121 S.Ct. at 2155, the question of qualified

Schuckman v. Babin

District Court, D. Kansas · Mar 6, 2025

The Court proceeds directly to the second qualified-immunity prong: whether these rights were clearly established. … Schuckman has not shown a violation of clearly established rights. Both officers are therefore entitled to qualified immunity. B.

Williams v. Richland County Children Services

861 F. Supp. 2d 874 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2011

Parker, in his individual capacity on the grounds of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity claims are analyzed under the following three-part test: (1) whether a constitutional right was violated; (2) whether that right was clearly established and one of which a reasonable person would have known

Rayborn v. Bossier Parish School System

198 F. Supp. 3d 747 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jul 18, 2016

or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.’ ” Cutler v. … As explained below, Plaintiff has likewise failed to establish a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, such that Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on that claim, as well. .

Adams v. Wainwright

512 F. Supp. 948 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Apr 15, 1981

In addition, at the time of these officials’ actions, there were no “clearly established judicial decisions” making their actions unconstitutional. Dilmore v. Stubbs, supra at 969, citing Bogard v. … These officials did not act with such disregard of the plaintiff’s clearly *955 established constitutional rights that their actions cannot reasonably be characterized as being in good faith. Procunier v.