Case law

Langford v. GRADY COUNTY DETENTION CENTER

670 F. Supp. 2d 1213 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 17, 2009

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 person would have known … In raising the qualified immunity defense, Defendants do not contend qualified immunity should be granted on grounds of lack of clearly established federal law.

Rivera-Freytes v. Puerto Rico

894 F. Supp. 2d 159 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Sep 28, 2012

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity “provides defendant public officials an immunity from suit and not a mere defense to liability.” Fontanes, 568 F.3d at 268 (internal citation omitted). … Defendant public officials are entitled to qualified immunity unless “(1) the facts alleged or shown by plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional right and (2) such right was clearly established at the time of the

Ludwig v. Learjet, Inc.

830 F. Supp. 995 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Aug 6, 1993

The immunity given an employee of a governmental agency is a qualified grant of immunity which is an affirmative defense. 8 Hoffman v. … Thus, the criteria for granting qualified governmental immunity has not been met. Therefore, defendant Fair is not shielded from plaintiffs tort claims based on the doctrine of qualified governmental immunity. B.

United States v. Kuznetsov

442 F. Supp. 2d 102 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 24, 2006

Defendant also states that he qualifies as a diplomatic agent because of his participation in the Geneva Group. … Accordingly, the Court finds that Defendant has not established that he is entitled to immunity under the Vienna Convention as a diplomatic agent. 2.

DeCotiis v. Whittemore

842 F. Supp. 2d 354 · District Court, D. Maine · Feb 2, 2012

The Court *360 dismissed Count One against Whittemore in her official capacity because it was redundant of the claim against CDS-Cumberland and against Whittemore in her individual capacity on qualified immunity grounds. … Hampshire Cnty., 307 F.3d 1, 7 (1st Cir.2002). 4 Ultimately, the First Circuit affirmed “the district court’s judgment dismissing the complaint against Whittemore, because she is entitled to qualified immunity in her individual

Weston J. Stow v. P Robert P. McGrath, et al.

2021 DNH 062 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Mar 29, 2021

Additionally, they assert that, even if a genuine dispute existed as to retaliation, they are protected by qualified immunity because Stow’s transfer did not violate any clearly established right. … from liability by qualified immunity.

Cameron v. Fair

887 F. Supp. 387 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 25, 1995

a strip search, there is still a question of whether qualified immunity bars this action against Noonan, Fair and DaSilva. … The magistrate judge did not consider the defendants’ argument that they are protected by qualified immunity.

Laughter v. Kay

986 F. Supp. 1362 · District Court, D. Utah · Oct 29, 1997

Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity so long as their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … . 2 Defendants argue that because no clearly established law required that all information supporting probable cause be contained within the four corners of the affidavit, they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Drudge v. City of Kissimmee

581 F. Supp. 2d 1176 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 25, 2008

“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 … Although Sergeant Lanphere argues in his summary judgment motion that the statutory interpretation issue pertains to the “clearly established” prong of the Saucier qualified immunity test (see Doc. 41 at 15), my conclusion

Puliafico v. County of San Bernardino

42 F. Supp. 2d 1000 · District Court, C.D. California · Apr 12, 1999

To determine whether a public official is entitled to qualified immunity, the Court asks “whether reasonable officers could have believed their conduct lawful under the clearly established principles of law governing that … could have believed their conduct lawful under the clearly established principles of law governing that conduct.”

Brown v. Busch

954 F. Supp. 588 · District Court, W.D. New York · Jan 21, 1997

Qualified Immunity. Defendants also move for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. … Even when such rights are clearly established, qualified immunity will protect a government official “if it was objectively reasonable for [the official] to believe that his acts did not violate those rights.”

Perkins v. Cross

562 F. Supp. 85 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Apr 29, 1983

It fails to raise the affirmative defense of qualified immunity, which protects police officers who make an arrest in good faith and for probable cause. … The law is clear that the qualified immunity defense must be affirmatively pled, which was not done in this case. Gomez v.

Segreto v. Kirschner

977 F. Supp. 553 · District Court, D. Connecticut · May 30, 1997

Summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity is appropriate if the court finds that the rights asserted were not clearly established or that, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and with … Qualified Immunity/Duty to Intervene Government officials are shielded from liability for damages on account of their performance of discretionary official functions “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Kmetz v. State Historical Society

304 F. Supp. 2d 1108 · District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Feb 3, 2004

Even if the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged injury, a public official may still be entitled to qualified immunity if he makes an objectively reasonable mistake about what the law requires … established at the time defendants acted, they are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Meyer v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

929 F. Supp. 10 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 24, 1996

Courts have held that plaintiffs relying on Bivens are held to a "heightened pleading standard” requiring plaintiffs to “specify the 'clearly established’ rights they allege to have been violated with ... precision].” … Additionally, federal officials are entitled to qualified immunity from constitutional and statutory claims, and the plaintiff has the burden of showing that the defendants’ alleged actions violated clearly established law

Miller v. Roycroft

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 31, 2024

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages if their conduct “does not violate clearly established … Clearly Established Right The Court now turns to the clearly established prong of qualified immunity.

FUTURE DEV. OF PR v. Estado Libre Asociado De PR

276 F. Supp. 2d 228 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jun 26, 2003

However, Defendants argue that, in their individual capacities, they are also protected by qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity "was created to shield government officials from civil liability for the performance of discretionary functions so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or

Dodge v. County of Orange

226 F.R.D. 177 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 27, 2005

Since the law on this point cannot be considered “clearly established” as of the time the searches were conducted on the members of the proposed class, qualified immunity is a common defense applicable to Sheriff Bigger as … immunity purposes, was "clearly established.”

Carson v. Lewis

35 F. Supp. 2d 250 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 4, 1999

qualified immunity. … Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for damages as long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights, Harlow v.

Felton v. Lincoln

429 F. Supp. 2d 226 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 17, 2006

Qualified Immunity Finally, the defendants have each moved for summary judgment on the grounds of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages when “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable