Case law

Big Bear Cartage, Inc. v. Air Cargo, Inc.

419 F. Supp. 982 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 9, 1976

In short, the service contracts are authorized by an agreement to which an air carrier is a signatory, and qualify for the § 1384 immunity. … Plaintiff does not dispute that Agreement No. 1041, as an agreement among air carriers, qualifies for the § 1384 immunity.

Quarterman v. City of Springfield

716 F. Supp. 2d 67 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 28, 2009

Defendants’ Immunity Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified and/or absolute immunity against suits for damages under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983. … Immunity Neither Defendant is entitled to absolute or qualified immunity on the remaining state law claims.

Dixie Brewing Co. v. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

952 F. Supp. 2d 809 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Jun 10, 2013

By relying on the Tucker Act, which no longer confers jurisdiction on this Court, Dixie cannot establish federal question jurisdiction or waiver of sovereign immunity. C. … The case literature clearly establishes the four prerequisites for the issuance of an injunction.

Entergy Arkansas, Inc. v. Nebraska

68 F. Supp. 2d 1104 · District Court, D. Nebraska · Sep 22, 1999

I have considered and rejected the defense of qualified immunity. … This federal obligation was clearly established when the Compact was signed by Nebraska; that is, the obligation of objective good faith imposed on the host state and its employees was plain from the Compact itself.

Draper v. Walsh

790 F. Supp. 1553 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 17, 1991

ANALYSIS Walsh moves for summary judgment based on a qualified immunity defense. See Snell v. … Runner, 854 F.2d 374, 377 (10th Cir.1988) (discussing standard for granting summary judgment based on qualified immunity).

Caine v. Burge

897 F. Supp. 2d 714 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 14, 2012

The court further found that the prosecutor was not entitled to qualified immunity for alleged pretrial activities because, if proven, the plaintiffs’ asserted claims constitute a violation of a clearly established constitutional … established due process rights.”

Pakootas v. Teck Cominco Metals, Ltd.

632 F. Supp. 2d 1029 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 19, 2009

Congress can waive a tribe’s immunity from suit, but that waiver must be clearly expressed. Congress has plenary power over tribal sovereignty, but must make clear its intent to limit that sovereignty. … However, such a conclusion is of dubious validity inasmuch as a tribe’s disposal activities would clearly be subject to regulation under RCRA as well as SDWA and the CWA.

Dukes v. City of New York

879 F. Supp. 335 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 7, 1995

of qualified immunity. … Consequently, Morgan is immune from liability under § 1983 on grounds of qualified immunity. V.

Evanouski v. Cantrell

58 F. Supp. 2d 935 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 22, 1999

Judge Cantrell also raises the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Under that doctrine, once Evanouski establishes that his allegations make out a violation of a constitutional right, the inquiry becomes whether the that right was clearly established.

Mitchell O/B/O X.M. v. Dakota Cnty. Soc. Servs.

357 F. Supp. 3d 891 · District Court, D. Maine · Jan 28, 2019

Malice is not present if a defendant's conduct (1) objectively was legally reasonable, (2) was performed in good faith, or (3) did not violate a "clearly established" right. Gleason v. Metro. … Because the malice exception to official immunity requires an intentional commission of an act, the amended complaint's allegations of negligence do not qualify for this exception.

FRESH START SUBSTANCE SERVICES, LLC v. Galvin

599 F. Supp. 2d 279 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Feb 13, 2009

the defendant in his individual capacity had been stated in the complaint, such a claim would be precluded by the qualified immunity defense. 7 Analysis of a qualified immunity claim involves a three-step inquiry. … Second, the violated right must have been clearly established at the time of the conduct. Finally, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant’s actions were not objectively reasonable. Id.

Gamboa v. King County

562 F. Supp. 2d 1288 · District Court, W.D. Washington · May 7, 2008

Police officers are, however, entitled to qualified immunity for their actions. … Qualified immunity shields government officials, acting within one of their discretionary functions, from civil liability as long as their conduct “does not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Powers-Bunce v. District of Columbia

541 F. Supp. 2d 57 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 2008

Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability under § 1983 provided that the official’s conduct did not violate a clearly established constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known. … Ramsey, 434 F.3d 565, 572 (D.C.Cir.2006) (“Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

East Coast Serv. Indus. Co. Inc., d/b/a Whiskeys 20, Thomas Svoleantopoulos, and Rosalie Sweeney v. N.H. State Liquor Commission, et al.

2020 DNH 164 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Sep 17, 2020

The motion to dismiss could have more clearly asserted that Plaia and Doe, like the Commission, raised Eleventh Amendment immunity as to Count I. … Therefore, for both Rule 12(b)(6) and the defense of qualified immunity, the court determines whether Whiskeys 20 has stated a constitutional violation. 1.

Román v. University of Puerto Rico

799 F. Supp. 2d 120 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jul 27, 2011

Therefore, the Court concludes that Cardona’s Title V claims clearly arise out of Title I, the employment discrimination provision. 42 U.S.C. § 12112 . … Thus, while the First Circuit established a new test for evaluating Eleventh Amendment immunity, the result for the UPR is consistent with the First Circuit’s vast prior precedent also affording Eleventh Amendment protection

Verser v. Elyea

113 F. Supp. 2d 1211 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 27, 2000

Page and Snyder claim they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity should be granted when the official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. Harlow v.

Stellmaker v. DePetrillo

710 F. Supp. 891 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Apr 19, 1989

Smith, 472 U.S. 479, 484-85 , 105 S.Ct. 2787 , 86 L.Ed.2d 384 (1985) (petition to government entitled to only qualified immunity from libel suit; noting standard identical to that for other first amendment expression). … O’Connor, 611 F.Supp. 210 (D.Mass.1985) (“Gavrilles II”) (first amendment protects right to be free from retaliation for seeking redress collectively; rejecting qualified immunity); see, e.g., Henderson v.

O.F. Ex Rel. N.S. v. Chester Upland School District

246 F. Supp. 2d 409 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 10, 2002

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 To establish a violation of § 504, Plaintiff must demonstrate that (1) O.F. is disabled as defined by the Act; (2) she is “otherwise qualified” to participate in school activities … The ADA clearly states Congress’ intent to hold states liable for violations of the ADA. 8 See Lavia, 224 F.3d at 196.

Gilliam v. United States Department of Justice

128 F. Supp. 3d 134 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 1, 2015

Supp. 2d 300, 311 (D.D.C. 2013) (stating that “a plaintiff must allege sufficient facts to establish that the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity” at the motion to dismiss stage). … Thus, Plaintiff faces a high bar to establish that the individual law enforcement officials are not entitled to qualified immunity. See Messerschmidt, 132 S. Ct. at 1245.

Caraballo Seda v. JAVIER RIVERA

306 F. Supp. 2d 108 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Mar 1, 2004

Of these, only one addresses a substantive issue, that of whether or not-qualified immunity is foreclosed because of the factual circumstances of this case. … dis *112 crimination based on political animus, summary judgment based on a qualified immunity defense may not be granted at this time.