Case law

Gonzalez v. Narcato

363 F. Supp. 2d 486 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 24, 2005

Qualified Immunity Plaintiff fails to establish that any of the defendants violated his constitutional rights. … Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity if either (a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendants to believe that their action did their not

Scott v. Ozmint

467 F. Supp. 2d 564 · District Court, D. South Carolina · Dec 14, 2006

The Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from suit in this case because their conduct did not violate any clearly established constitutional or statutory riyhts of which a reasonable person should have known Even … As the Plaintiff has shown no violation of a clearly established right, the Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity and the Plaintiffs action should be dismissed as a matter of law. F.

Brettler v. Purdue University

408 F. Supp. 2d 640 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 10, 2006

State Immunity from Suit Under Title I of the ADA Title I of the ADA prohibits certain employers, including the States, from “discriminating] against a qualified individual with a disability because of the disability of such … To establish a claim under Title II, Brettler must prove: (1) that he is a qualified individual; (2) with a disability; and (3) that he was excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of the services, programs,

Nelson v. City of Davis

709 F. Supp. 2d 978 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 29, 2010

Qualified Immunity The qualified immunity doctrine shields public officials liability for the performance of their discretionary functions unless the official violates a clearly established constitutional norm of which a … The dispositive question therefore becomes whether the right abridged by that violation was “clearly established.”

Dill v. Village of Gowanda

952 F. Supp. 989 · District Court, W.D. New York · Jan 21, 1997

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 [or her] acts did not violate those rights.”

Gibbs v. Plain Green, LLC

331 F. Supp. 3d 518 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Jul 27, 2018

Britton , 523 U.S. 574 , 598, 118 S.Ct. 1584 , 140 L.Ed.2d 759 (1998) (analyzing the potential burden of discovery in the context of a claim of qualified immunity). … Great Plains has not presented circumstances that clearly and convincingly show an entitlement to the protection of sovereign immunity.

Hodge v. Bartram

District Court, D. New Mexico · Sep 13, 2021

Relevant Law on Qualified Immunity5 Qualified immunity shields state officials from liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Clearly, the door has been left open for certain cases to still warrant denial of qualified immunity based on Graham.

Alston v. Virginia High School League, INC.

108 F. Supp. 2d 543 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Aug 19, 1997

Although local governing bodies are, in a sense, arms of the state, the Court has distinguished them from state agencies, because local entities clearly enjoy no immunity from § 1983 suits when the allegedly unconstitutional … up of a group of local government officials, all of whom have individual qualified immunity; and (2) its relationship to the state is akin to that of state employees who have qualified immunity are unpersuasive because of

Angueira v. Arias

649 F. Supp. 299 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Oct 21, 1986

qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” … THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY DEFENSE.

Scott v. City of Overland Park

595 F. Supp. 520 · District Court, D. Kansas · Sep 11, 1984

Defendant Pipes is not entitled to qualified immunity in this action. In the case of Harlow v. … The law regarding sex discrimination is clearly established.

Kraft v. City of New York

696 F. Supp. 2d 403 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 21, 2010

Qualified Immunity as to Federal Claims Against the Doctor Defendants The doctor defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity shields police officers from personal liability for “official conduct that ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

Gesell v. Cottonwood, City of

District Court, D. Arizona · Mar 27, 2025

Courts “have discretion to address the 15 ‘clearly established’ prong of the qualified immunity test first; if [they] conclude that the 16 relevant law was not clearly established, [they] need not address the other … City of Santa Maria, 915 F.3d 592, 603-04 (9th Cir. 2019) 17 (“Our qualified immunity determination with respect to Officer Brice rests solely on the 18 ‘clearly established’ law prong; we do not reach the question

Englert v. City of McKeesport

637 F. Supp. 930 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 18, 1986

To qualify as “state action”, anticompetitive activities by a municipality must have been undertaken pursuant to a clearly expressed state policy. Town of Hallie v. … In attempting to establish that McKeesport’s actions were taken pursuant to a “clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed state policy,” McKeesport relies primarily on statutory provisions of the Pennsylvania Third Class

Klitzman, Klitzman & Gallagher v. Krut

591 F. Supp. 258 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 25, 1984

investigative functions, for which only a qualified immunity is appropriate. … established rights will have been violated.

Andersen v. McCotter

3 F. Supp. 2d 1223 · District Court, D. Utah · Apr 2, 1998

Finally, she claimed that the law was clearly established in this area, thereby precluding Defendants’ claims of qualified immunity. … to qualified immunity.

Yacovelli v. Moeser

324 F. Supp. 2d 760 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 7, 2004

A claim can be dismissed on qualified immunity grounds if the allegations of a complaint against a public official fail to state a violation of a clearly-established right. Korb v. … Courts evaluate qualified immunity claims by first determining wheth *765 er the plaintiffs’ allegations, if true, establish the deprivation of a constitutional right. Mellen v.

Paulin v. Figlia

916 F. Supp. 2d 524 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 10, 2013

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity is immunity from suit rather than a defense to liability. Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985). … No defendant argues at this stage that qualified immunity bars plaintiff's excessive force claims.

Lipton v. County of Orange, NY

315 F. Supp. 2d 434 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 14, 2004

“The qualified immunity doctrine shields ‘government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … judgment on qualified immunity grounds is inappropriate.”

Brown v. Selwin

250 F. Supp. 2d 299 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 24, 1999

(Mukasey Order dated June 18, 1998). 17 *309 Qualified Immunity Defense Brown’s claims against the State Defendants may (also) be dismissed on the grounds of qualified immunity. … “Even where the plaintiffs federal rights and the scope of the official’s permissible conduct are clearly established, the qualified immunity defense protects a government actor if it was ‘objectively reasonable’ for him

Warboys v. Proulx

303 F. Supp. 2d 111 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Feb 4, 2004

clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … We have explained that "even where the plaintiff’s federal rights and the scope of the official’s permissible conduct are clearly established, the qualified immunity defense protects a government actor if it was 'objectively