Case law

HARGROVES v. City of New York

694 F. Supp. 2d 198 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 4, 2010

Qualified immunity Under the qualified-immunity doctrine, Defendants can avoid liability even if there are material questions of fact as to probable cause. Brewton, 550 F.Supp.2d at 367 . … Following these decisions, discovery proceeded solely with respect to the question of qualified immunity. {See id. at 12.)

Johnson v. Davis

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 8, 2020

Harris, 935 19 F.3d 670, 676 (9th Cir. 2019) (“[T]here are rare cases where an affirmative defense, such as 20 immunity, may be so clear on the face of the complaint that dismissal may qualify as a strike for 21 … The danger faced by the plaintiff must be “clearly related to [the] initial 4 complaint.” Williams v. Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2015) (discussing nexus 5 requirement).

Williams v. Brown

269 F. Supp. 2d 987 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 1, 2003

If the jury accepts the plaintiffs’ version of what occurred, qualified immunity would not protect the officers; the need for individualized suspicion prior to a search for weapons has been clearly established doctrine for … “Qualified immunity protects public officials from civil suit based on their discretionary functions except where such conduct violated ‘clearly established’ federal law.” Burns v. Reed, 44 F.3d 524, 526 (7th Cir.1995).

Eubanks v. Gerwens

771 F. Supp. 1216 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 11, 1991

First, they argue they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Defendants have raised the issue of qualified immunity. Such immunity is usually available where the officials involved believed their actions to be lawful. See Clark v.

Robertson v. McCloskey

666 F. Supp. 241 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 24, 1987

their conduct did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … , 753 F.2d at 100 (recognizing qualified immunity for Senate aides charged with violating plaintiff’s constitutional rights); Doe v.

Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States v. Mischo

363 F. Supp. 2d 1239 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 14, 2005

SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY “The United States is a sovereign, and, as such, is immune from suit unless it has expressly waived such immunity and consented to be sued.” Gilbert v. DaGrossa, 756 F.2d 1455, 1458 (9th Cir.1985). … Therefore, pursuant to the express terms of the statute, a wrongful levy may be established, and the United States’ sovereign immunity is waived, if three prerequisites are established: 1) the party asserting the wrongful

Astrada v. Howard

979 F. Supp. 90 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Apr 8, 1997

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 to … The undisputed facts detailed above lead the court unavoidably to its conclusion that officers Howard, Reis, Carpenter and Allen were shielded by qualified immunity.

Remillard Ex Rel. Estate of Remillard v. City of Egg Harbor City

424 F. Supp. 2d 766 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 27, 2006

established Fourth Amendment right. 6 As these same factual questions bear upon the issue of qualified immunity, the Court likewise cannot now decide that question of law because its determination hinges upon resolving highly … The qualified immunity inquiry requires the Court to evaluate whether the officers’ conduct violates "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

Cook v. Smith

812 F. Supp. 561 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 10, 1993

Common Pleas Court of Lehigh County, 515 F.Supp. 1074, 1076 (E.D.Pa.1981), the court stated that a court reporter’s qualified immunity shields her from suit when she acts pursuant to “lawful authority or follows a judge’s … Defendant’s actions are clearly within her general subject matter jurisdiction and responsibilities as a court reporter.

Lewis v. Goodie

798 F. Supp. 382 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jul 16, 1992

The affirmative defense of qualified immunity was not raised by the defendants in their pleadings, memoranda or at trial, and was, accordingly, waived. … defendant’s actions assessed in light of clearly established law. 483 U.S. at 639 , 107 S.Ct. at 3038 .

Kumar, ph.D. v. George Washington University

174 F. Supp. 3d 172 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2016

It is then the responsibility of the Provost to “determine whether to replace the challenged member with a qualified substitute.” Id. … This claim thus clearly fails as a matter of law. The claim of false light fails also. Kumar contends that “GW’s presentation of Dr.

Gross v. Bohn

782 F. Supp. 173 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 17, 1991

Qualified Immunity Defendant Morgan also argues that he is entitled to have the action dismissed based on qualified immunity. The United States Supreme Court set forth the standard for qualified immunity in Harlow v. … Vitale, 761 F.2d 812, 818 (1st Cir.1985) (stating firmly established principle of law that good faith defense of qualified immunity exists with respect to claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ).

Walton ex rel. R.W. v. Montgomery County Board of Education

371 F. Supp. 2d 1318 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · May 20, 2005

DeKalb County, Ga., 62 F.3d 338, 340 (11th Cir.1995)(“no clearly established right exists under the equal protection clause to be free from retaliation.”). … The individual Defendants in their individual capacities also would be entitled to qualified immunity because there is no clearly established law which would have given the Defendants fair warning that a school representative

Shivers v. Grubbs

747 F. Supp. 434 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 23, 1990

Inasmuch as the Court made no findings of fact, and its only conclusion of law, qualified immunity, was adequately addressed by the October 27, 1989 Order of this Court, we will restrict the review to that encompassed under … immunity.

Island Aviation, Inc. v. Mariana Islands Airport Authority

1 N. Mar. I. Commw. 633 · District Court, Northern Mariana Islands · May 26, 1983

Moreover, the Defendants argue that Shoda is shielded by common law immunity and qualified immunity. *640 II. ISSUES The facts as presented clearly frame the two critical issues which must be resolved by the Court. … Having failed to establish either reasonableness or good faith in defense *649 of his conduct, the Defendant Shoda cannot avail himself of the qualified immunity defense and thereby insulate his actions from liability under

I.W v. City of Clovis Police Department

District Court, D. New Mexico · May 25, 2021

officer violated clearly established law. … In sum, the Court finds that Officer Aguilar’s actions are not entitled to qualified immunity at this stage, because a reasonable jury could conclude that his decision to release Leo violated I.W.’s clearly established

Akers v. Watts

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 24, 2010

Qualified Immunity “[G]overnment officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Because qualified immunity is “an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability, . . . it is effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial.” Mitchell v.

Wantanabe Realty Corp. v. City of New York

315 F. Supp. 2d 375 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 14, 2003

Then we consider if the violated right was clearly established at the time of the conduct. … Defendants may benefit from qualified immunity if plaintiff is unable to establish any of these three steps.” 155 The Court turns to a determination of whether Zeid and Hilton are entitled to qualified immunity on the surviving

Peña-Peña v. Figueroa-Sancha

866 F. Supp. 2d 81 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jun 11, 2012

Qualified Immunity The Court’s focus now shifts to the qualified immunity doctrine, which the Supervisors contend shields them from this litigation. … The qualified immunity inquiry is a two-part test. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 , 129 S.Ct. 808 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009).

North Carolina Ex Rel. Hailey v. Westmoreland

267 F. Supp. 2d 497 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 18, 2003

This is because government officials (including police officers), when performing duties within the scope of their employment, are immune from suit unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional … Therefore, he is entitled to qualified immunity.