Case law

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. .

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.

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.

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.

Smith v. Milwaukee County

954 F. Supp. 1314 · District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Feb 14, 1997

To the contrary, qualified immunity shields government officials who are performing discretionary functions from liabiEty for eivE damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly estabhshed statutory or constitutional … Given these circumstances, the court concludes that Defendant Artison is not entitled to qualified immunity from liability for money damages. VI.

Abdush-Shahid v. Coughlin

933 F. Supp. 168 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 24, 1996

The defendants also assert that in any event they are entitled to qualified immunity. I. … Although the plaintiffs right to prompt medical treatment was clearly established at all times relevant to this suit, the defendants are still entitled to summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, however, if they can

Vickery v. Jones

878 F. Supp. 1179 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 7, 1995

, the defendants were put in the position of possibly *1186 losing their qualified immunity if they did not change their policy. … As discussed above, the award of qualified immunity precludes an award of damages.

Bryant v. Ciminelli

267 F. Supp. 3d 467 · District Court, W.D. New York · Jul 26, 2017

Defendants raise the issue of qualified immunity. (Dkt. 3-2 at 10). Qualified immunity can be established by the facts alleged in a complaint. Garcia v. Does, 779 F.3d 84, 97 (2d Cir. 2015). … See id. at 92 (“Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability for civil damages when one of two conditions is satisfied: (a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively

Adams v. Bouchard

591 F. Supp. 2d 1191 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 4, 2008

Qualiñed Immunity Defendants have also moved for summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity is “an entitlement not to stand trial or face the other burdens of litigation” if the complained of behavior did not violate clearly established law. Mitchell v.

Chandler v. Neff

298 F. 515 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Apr 5, 1924

The issue raised by the petition as a whole/ is clearly the assertion of a political right granted by the Constitution of the United States and denied by an act of the state of Texas. … This might render it unnecessary to decide the second question, but it has been well and clearly presented, and even though it may be unnecessary to decide it, nevertheless the parties, because of the importance of the questions

O'QUINN v. Chambers County, Tex.

636 F. Supp. 1388 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 4, 1986

Qualified Immunity Defendant Morris asserts qualified immunity pursuant to Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). … Plaintiffs claims of retaliation and intimidation under § 1983 and § 1985 state violations of clearly established law; therefore, defendant Morris is not immune from suit. V.

Gretzula v. Camden County Technical Schools Board of Education

965 F. Supp. 2d 478 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 14, 2013

This statement came in the context of assessing whether an interlocutory appeal regarding qualified immunity was timely when the district court had not addressed qualified immunity because it had improperly characterized … Thomas is inapposite because it involved a “pleading as to which a qualified immunity defense cannot reasonably be framed.” Id. at 289.

Garmhausen v. Holder

757 F. Supp. 2d 123 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 3, 2010

“At the motion to dismiss stage of a civil damages action, a defendant is entitled to the shield of qualified immunity if the allegations of the complaint fail to state a claim that his conduct violated ‘clearly established … McCarthy is entitled to qualified immunity with respect this alleged communication because the allegations fail to state a claim that this conduct violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right, especially

Massasoit v. Carter

439 F. Supp. 2d 463 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 12, 2006

As for Butler’s assertion of qualified immunity, a police officer is immune from claims brought under § 1983 unless his conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Therefore, just as Butler’s qualified immunity claim failed on plaintiffs’ excessive force claims under § 1983, his public officer immunity claim fails as to the state law claims. 4.

Jernigan v. Richard

907 F. Supp. 2d 998 · District Court, D. Arizona · Jan 11, 2012

Qualified Immunity A law enforcement officer is entitled to qualified immunity unless: (1) he or she deprived the Plaintiff of a significant constitutional right; and (2) that constitutional right was “clearly established … Therefore, the Defendants argue, because even judges disagree about whether there was a Brady *1032 violation in this case, the right in this factual setting is not clearly established and they are entitled to qualified immunity

Freeman v. Ellis

District Court, W.D. New York · Jun 13, 2022

Qualified immunity shields government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … A right is considered “clearly established” when “[t]he contours of the right . . .

S & M BRANDS, INC. v. Summers

393 F. Supp. 2d 604 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Oct 6, 2005

The threshold question for determining whether Parker immunity attaches, therefore, is whether the action in question qualifies as an affirmative act by the state itself. … In the case at bar, Plaintiffs’ obligation to place substantial amounts of money into an escrow account for a period of twenty-five years clearly qualifies as a deprivation of property, regardless of whether they maintain

Keele v. Glynn County

938 F. Supp. 2d 1270 · District Court, S.D. Georgia · Mar 29, 2013

Qualified Immunity Defendants assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity. Specifically, Defendants assert that their actions were discretionary and did not violate clearly established law. Dkt. … The Eleventh Circuit established a burden-shifting framework within which to analyze a defendant’s qualified immunity defense.

Fulcher v. City of Wichita

445 F. Supp. 2d 1271 · District Court, D. Kansas · Aug 18, 2006

Immunity Defendant Williams moves to dismiss plaintiffs’ section 1983 claim on the grounds of qualified immunity. … clearly established at the time and supervisor was not entitled to qualified immunity); Johnson v.