Case law

Routon v. Dameron

District Court, W.D. Virginia · May 26, 2020

Rather, officers are entitled to qualified immunity against suits for damages if a reasonable officer facing the same situation would not have known that his actions violated the plaintiff’s clearly established … immunity on the excessive force claims.

Morgan v. Sharon Pennsylvania Board of Education

472 F. Supp. 1157 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 27, 1979

Defendants further contend that even in the absence of absolute immunity, count two is barred by a qualified immunity that they are entitled to invoke. … At this stage of the litigation, however, it is premature to determine whether or not the requisite good faith needed for qualified immunity has been established.

Lyman v. City of Albany

597 F. Supp. 2d 301 · District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 13, 2009

Qualified Immunity In the alternative, Defendant’s summary judgment Motion is granted and the remaining claim against him is dismissed on the basis of qualified immunity. … The defense of 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

Chun-Yu Zhao v. Holder

890 F. Supp. 2d 71 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 12, 2012

All three defendants, acting in their respective official capacities, enjoy qualified immunity against “liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Plaintiff argues that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity in light of their “failure to simply investigate her scientifically substantiated claim of misconduct.” Pl.’s Opp. to Defs.’

Rzayeva v. United States

492 F. Supp. 2d 60 · District Court, D. Connecticut · May 31, 2007

Qualified Immunity To the extent any claims remain against Defendants Chen, Hames, or the individual State Defendants, they are dismissed because these defendants are entitled to varying degrees of qualified immunity. … Plaintiffs have not established that Mr. Chen violated their clearly established constitutional rights by declining to investigate or prosecute Ms. Musay-elova’s death.

Sawyer v. Asbury

861 F. Supp. 2d 737 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · May 18, 2012

Sept. 30, 2008) (stating that officer was not entitled to qualified immunity on claim that he allegedly punched a handcuffed prisoner in the back of the head); see also Jones v. … . *745 2003) (finding no qualified immunity on Fourth Amendment claim against officer who knocked individual to the ground and jumped on him in a holding center); Bailey v.

Pete v. Tacoma School District No. 10

198 F. Supp. 3d 1206 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 29, 2016

Analyzing qualified immunity is a two-pronged test, considering (1) whether the conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) whether the right was clearly established. Saucier v. … The parties should first focus them discovery on issues of qualified immunity. a.

Ollar v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 8, 2022

“To overcome a claim of qualified immunity, plaintiffs must show both (1) that an official ‘violated a constitutional right’ and (2) that ‘the right was clearly established’ at the time of the violation.” … Without showing any constitutional violation at all, Plaintiffs a fortiori cannot show the violation of any “clearly established” right. See Johnson, 734 F.3d at 1201–02.

Wilson Ex Rel. Estate of Wilson v. Taylor

597 F. Supp. 2d 451 · District Court, D. Delaware · Feb 13, 2009

Qualified Immunity under Federal and State Law In their motion for summary judgment, defendants claim that the doctrine of qualified immunity applies to all defendants in their individual capacities and that, therefore, this … right; and (2) the right was clearly established in the light of the specific context of the case.”

Beg Investments, LLC v. Alberti

85 F. Supp. 3d 13 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 24, 2015

As a result, Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on the RICO and Hobbs Act claims. Id. … Rather, the Court found that Defendants were “entitled to qualified immunity on the RICO and Hobbs Act claims because Plaintiff has failed to allege that Defendants’ imposition of a Reimbursable Detail violated clearly

Weiss v. Missouri Dept. of Mental Health

587 F. Supp. 1157 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Mar 29, 1984

Thus, defendants did not violate any "clearly established right" of plaintiff on this occasion. … Thus, the Court concludes that such a right was not clearly established in March, 1979, and that defendants are therefore immune under Harlow for failing to provide such a hearing.

Davis v. Bruce

215 F.R.D. 612 · District Court, D. Kansas · Mar 24, 2003

Accordingly, *619 the individual defendants raise the defense of qualified immunity. … Presentation of the defense of qualified immunity shifts the burden to the plaintiff to show that “(1) the official violated a constitutional or statutory right; and (2) the constitutional or statutory right was clearly established

Bartels v. Incorporated Village of Lloyd Harbor

97 F. Supp. 3d 198 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 31, 2015

Qualified Immunity The individually named defendants assert that principals of qualified immunity further support the dismissal of plaintiffs claims against them. … “The doctrine of 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

Sánchez-Arroyo v. Department of Education

842 F. Supp. 2d 416 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Feb 1, 2012

Qualified Immunity Defendants next argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on the grounds that Plaintiff has failed to establish a violation of law by Defendants, and that in any case, Plaintiff failed to casually … Consequently, Sánchez’s right to speak out against the practices of Defendants was clearly established at the time of her hostile work environment, and therefore Defendants’ motion to dismiss due to qualified immunity must

Lovell v. Floyd County

710 F. Supp. 1364 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Mar 31, 1989

Qualified immunity insulates government officials from personal liability when performing discretionary functions insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … Summary judgment on Lovell’s first amendment claim based on the individual defendant’s qualified immunity is not warranted because a jury could find that Defendants violated Lovell’s clearly established first amendment rights

Morro v. City of Birmingham

897 F. Supp. 553 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Mar 23, 1995

This court now attempts to resolve both by expressing its belief that the law of the Eleventh Circuit with respect to qualified immunity is not and cannot be that such absolute immunity is always available as a defense for … an individual official if his articulated explanation for his action or inaction is “objectively reasonable,” that is, not contrary to clearly established constitutional principles, even though that articulated explanation

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.

Federico v. Capital Gaming International, Inc.

888 F. Supp. 354 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Jun 20, 1995

The First Circuit has firmly established that the Narragansett Indian Tribe has been federally recognized as a tribe that enjoys “a government-to-govemment relationship to the United States.” Maynard v. … Plaintiff argues that the Tribe waived its immunity by retaining “a citizen of the State,” an active lobbyist, to assist the tribe in achieving qualifying status, pursuant to the Gaming Act, “to conduct Class III Gaming.”

Kanelos v. County of Mohave

893 F. Supp. 2d 1001 · District Court, D. Arizona · Sep 6, 2012

Qualified Immunity Defendants contend that Ekstrom and Walker are entitled to qualified immunity. … The doctrine of 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

Shedrick v. District Board of Trustees of Miami-Dade College

941 F. Supp. 2d 1348 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 23, 2013

The Tenth Circuit further stated, “Moreover, this Court has long held that both qualified and absolute immunity are affirmative defenses that must be pleaded.” Id. … the proceedings, to mean that statutory limits on liability are more akin to defenses of absolute or qualified immunity that must be raised in the pleadings than to the defense of Eleventh Amendment immunity.