Case law

Noah v. AOL Time Warner, Inc.

261 F. Supp. 2d 532 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · May 15, 2003

Title II’s definition of “places of public accommodation” provides a list of “establishments” that qualify as such places. … Plaintiff argues that providing ISPs immunity against federal civil rights is bad policy. Yet, it is not the role of the federal courts to second-guess a clearly stated Congressional policy decision.

LaFlamme v. Societe Air France

702 F. Supp. 2d 136 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 5, 2010

Further, the Second Circuit has noted that it has allowed a qualified immunity defense to be "successfully asserted in a Rule 12(b)(6) motion on at least two occasions" where "the complaint itself established the circumstances … required as a predicate to a finding of qualified immunity."

Rogers v. Columbia/HCA of Central Louisiana, Inc.

971 F. Supp. 229 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jun 9, 1997

. § 11101 , et seq., which establishes immunity for physician peer review committee actions in qualifying circumstances. 2 This suit is precisely the type that the HCQIA is intended to prevent. … Immunity Under the HCQIA The HCQIA provides immunity for qualifying peer review actions. The principal issue in this ease is whether the defendants are shielded because they complied with the dictates of the HCQIA.

Muhammad ex rel. J.S. v. Abington Township Police Department

37 F. Supp. 3d 746 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 1, 2014

YAP program “did not violate clearly established law.” Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 243 , 129 S.Ct. 808 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009). For that reason, he is entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. See Reichle v. … There is no need to reach the defendants’ qualified immunity argument as to this claim, but I note that qualified immunity would not apply.

Dietz v. Damas

932 F. Supp. 431 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 11, 1996

In terms of qualified immunity for the City individual defendants in connection with the delay in providing a hearing, it is clear that their “conduct [did not] violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … If the outcome of the analysis is that no such right was violated, in the alternative, no clearly established right was violated and summary judgment should be granted on the basis of qualified immunity- And, if no constitutional

Pisello v. Town of Brookhaven

933 F. Supp. 202 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 10, 1996

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity “public officials are immune from § 1983 civil rights suits brought by an aggrieved citizen when their ‘conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Even if the right is clearly established, a defendant may still be entitled to qualified immunity where it was objectively reasonable for the official to believe that his acts did not violate that right. Jemmott v.

Spell v. McDaniel

591 F. Supp. 1090 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jul 12, 1984

Defendant City of Fayetteville and the supervisory defendants’ motion to dismiss on the basis of qualified immunity is DENIED. *1112 (4). … Paragraphs 2, 4 and 6 contain defendants’ assertion of their qualified good faith immunity defense.

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.

Wilson v. City of New York

800 F. Supp. 1098 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 4, 1992

Clifford’s Defense of Qualified Immunity. … The record fails to establish that Clifford is entitled to qualified immunity. III. In addition to stating claims under section 1983, the complaint invokes 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 , 1986.

Smith v. Houston Independent School District

229 F. Supp. 3d 571 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 17, 2017

Moreno, 667 F.3d 539, 551 (5th Cir. 2012); and (3) the HISD employees have qualified immunity from suit because “their conduct does not violate clear *580 ly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Tex. 2007) (dismissing RICO claim against individual defendant under qualified immunity) (citing Brown v. Nationsbank Corp., 188 F.3d 579, 588 (5th Cir. 1999)). Mr.

Cunningham v. Reid

337 F. Supp. 2d 1064 · District Court, W.D. Tennessee · Jul 13, 2004

violate[d] clearly established rights,” the court must deny summary judgment. … However, such a right was not clearly established at the time of Plaintiffs arrest as indicated by the authority cited in this order. Therefore, Defendant Officers are entitled to qualified immunity.

Gilles v. Alley

591 F. Supp. 181 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Jun 12, 1984

If the law at the time of an official’s action “was not clearly established,” then the action should proceed no further. Id. If it was clearly established, then the qualified immunity defense should fail. … Aside from the Pickering issue, this case presents one other difficulty that the Court finds sufficient by itself to establish defendant’s qualified immunity defense on this motion.

Doe v. United Social & Mental Health Services, Inc.

670 F. Supp. 1121 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Oct 9, 1987

Burke, 556 F.2d 231 (3d Cir.1977) (absolute immunity only for adjudicatory acts and qualified immunity for administrative acts); Wolfel v. … Sanborn, 666 F.2d 1005 (6th Cir.1981), vacated on other grounds, 458 U.S. 1102 , 102 S.Ct. 3476 , 73 L.Ed.2d 1363 (1982) (qualified immunity); Fowler v. Cross, 635 F.2d 476 (5th Cir.1981) (qualified immunity).

Bogosian v. Board of Education of Community Unit School District 200

73 F. Supp. 2d 949 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 29, 1999

Bogosian cannot establish the elements of an Illinois state tortious interference with contractual relations claim. … The defendants argue that the teachers’ statements were not tortious because they were protected by some (1) absolute or (2) qualified privilege or (3) the state Tort Immunity Act, and were in any event (4) admittedly true

Strinni v. Mehlville Fire Protection Dist.

681 F. Supp. 2d 1052 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Jan 6, 2010

The qualified immunity doctrine 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 … issue was clearly established at the time of the defendant's alleged misconduct.

Graham v. United States

528 F. Supp. 933 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 1981

The Special Agent’s role in the events complained of appears to be investigative, and thus gives rise to only a qualified immunity. 2. … Qualified Immunity Defendants’ third immunity argument is that qualified immunity insulates the Special Agent from this lawsuit. The qualified-immunity defense, as propounded in Wood v.

Jenkins v. City of New York

472 F. Supp. 2d 275 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 8, 2005

Police officers are entitled to qualified immunity if “(1) their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe their acts did not violate those … Miller, 66 F.3d 416, 423 (2d Cir.1995) (constitutional right not to be arrested without probable cause is clearly established).

L.S. v. Peterson

District Court, S.D. Florida · Oct 25, 2019

qualified immunity should not apply because: (1) the officers violated a constitutional right; and (2) that right was clearly established at the time of the incident.” … “A right may be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes in one of three ways: (1) case law with indistinguishable facts clearly establishing the constitutional right; (2) a broad statement of principle

Marino v. City University of New York

18 F. Supp. 3d 320 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 9, 2014

Although the Eleventh Amendment does not explicitly bar suits against a state by its own citizens, it is well established that a non-consenting state is immune from suits brought by its own citizens in federal court. … (“[Ajfter Garrett , New York’s continued acceptance of federal funds necessarily constituted a valid waiver of sovereign immunity because New York could no longer rely on a belief that Title II clearly constituted a valid

Ross v. United States

641 F. Supp. 368 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 25, 1986

Thus, to qualify for immunity, Mr. … Cf Hobson, supra, 737 F.2d at 20 (particularity in pleading required in civil rights complaints where defendant asserts qualified immunity). Plaintiffs’ theory with regard to Mr.