Case law

Kumar v. Chicago Housing Authority

862 F. Supp. 213 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 25, 1994

A staté official is immune from civil damages if *216 his or her actions are “objectively reasonable,”, i.e., if his or her conduct “ ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Qualified immunity shields the arresting officer from suit if “a reasonable officer could have believed [the plaintiffs arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the [arresting] officers

Bennett v. City of Slidell

518 F. Supp. 59 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Apr 3, 1981

Navaretta, 434 U.S. 555, 561 , 98 S.Ct. 855, 859 , 55 L.Ed.2d 24 , relied upon by the defendants as the basis for their claim to “absolute” immunity is inapposite, inasmuch as it speaks to “qualified” immunity only. … Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232 , 94 S.Ct. 1683 , 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974) (officers of the executive branch are to receive qualified immunity for acts of official conduct). Judgment will be entered accordingly.

Ratajack v. Brewster Fire Department, Inc.

178 F. Supp. 3d 118 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 31, 2016

Qualified Immunity for Jacobs, Goodwin, and Klosowski Defendants also argue that Jacobs, Goodwin, and Klosowski are immune from suit under the doctrine of qualified immunity. 24 Qualified immunity “gives government officials … A government official will be protected from liability for his discretionary actions by the doctrine of qualified immunity “if either (1) his conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Capshaw v. Thomas

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 1, 2024

immunity. … [defendant] was entitled to qualified immunity as to the claims against him in his individual capacity.”).

Sasnett v. Department of Corrections

891 F. Supp. 1305 · District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Jun 23, 1995

Finally, defendants contend that they are immune from liability for damages on all of plaintiffs’ claims because the law defendants are alleged to have violated was not clearly established at the time. *1309 I conclude that … Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity protects defendants sued in their individual capacity from liability for monetary damages when the defendant has not violated clearly established law.

Gattuso v. New Jersey Department of Human Services

881 F. Supp. 2d 639 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 25, 2012

As it is Plaintiffs’ burden *647 to establish the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction, and Plaintiffs have not pointed the Court to any valid abrogation clause for these claims (to the extent that either such statutory claim … Plaintiffs have not alleged that they themselves are independently qualified to receive services from Defendants.

Shellburne, Inc. v. New Castle County

293 F. Supp. 237 · District Court, D. Delaware · Nov 4, 1968

. 8 Despite this qualified immunity for defamation, the law generally gives members of lower legislative bodies, including those of Delaware, the same absolute immunity for legislative actions as have national and state legislators … There the Court held that a county prosecutor was immune from liability under § 1983 of the Civil Rights Act unless he was acting clearly outside his jurisdiction.

Katz v. NH DCYS

District Court, D. New Hampshire · Nov 20, 1996

All individual defendants were held to be entitled to qualified immunity as to the family integrity claims on grounds that the constitutional right was not clearly established in 1991, see Frazier, 957 F.2d at 931. … See also, Malachowski, 787 F.2d at 713-14 (compliance with state statute may provide qualified immunity).

Atchison v. Nelson

460 F. Supp. 1102 · District Court, D. Wyoming · Nov 17, 1978

Atchison contends that he was not fired either for cause or for failure to qualify for the reclassified position, but rather he was terminated to frustrate and silence his political and union activities as well as his opposition … A state’s immunity under the Eleventh Amendment may be waived, Gallagher v. Continental Insurance Co., 502 F.2d 827 (10th Cir. 1974), but a waiver of immunity or consent to be sued will not be implied easily.

Rolon v. Henneman

389 F. Supp. 2d 517 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 28, 2005

It is well established that testifying witnesses, including police officers, are entitled to absolute immunity from liability under § 1983 based on their testimony. See Briscoe v. … The “[f]unctions most apt to be accorded absolute, rather than qualified, immunity are those integrally related to the judicial process,” as “various safeguards are in place to minimize the risks that attend the improper

Milinazzo v. State Farm Insurance

247 F.R.D. 691 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 11, 2007

Work Product Immunity Claims of work product “immunity” are governed by the principles set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(3) which reads in pertinent part: [A] party may obtain discovery of documents and tangible … qualified for coverage under the terms and conditions of the policy.

Christianson v. Clarke

932 F. Supp. 1178 · District Court, D. Nebraska · Jun 26, 1996

to qualified immunity from liability for damages in their individual capacities. … Nor was it clearly established that Christianson had a liberty interest in a full evidentiary hearing before he was placed in administrative segregation. Hewitt v.

ABDUR-RAHEEM

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 2, 2026

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Defendants next argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate a clearly established right. (Motion at 7–12.) … Defendants rely on the clearly established prong as the basis for their assertion of qualified immunity.

Gogek v. Brown University

729 F. Supp. 926 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Feb 23, 1990

In 1986 he entered a one year program at Brown University Medical School to complete his residency in psychiatry and thereby qualify to take the test for board certification. … Subjecting employees performing those functions to personal liability while immunizing those performing duties of lesser importance is clearly not what Congress had in mind when it enacted either § 2679 or § 2680.

Payne v. Huntington Union Free School District

101 F. Supp. 2d 116 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 13, 2000

Defendants also move to dismiss the complaint against the individual defendants, asserting a qualified immunity defense. Plaintiff Kathleen M. Payne (“Payne”) opposes the motion. … See Charles W., 214 F.3d 350 (pointing out that the court first must address the sufficiency of the pleading of a constitutional violation prior to deliberating over the qualified immunity defense).

Neiberger v. Hawkins

150 F. Supp. 2d 1118 · District Court, D. Colorado · Jul 9, 2001

I also denied Defendants’ assertions of qualified immunity and immunity pursuant to the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act. Defendants pursued an interlocutory appeal, and the case was stayed. … “Second, ‘Congress may clearly and expressly abrogate the states’ immunity.’ ” Id. (citations omitted).

Nevin v. Citibank, N.A.

107 F. Supp. 2d 333 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 28, 2000

In addition, the Federal regulations at issue here clearly limit the immunity to communications made to law enforcement and regulatory agencies; nothing in the regulations can be read to extend such immunity to communications … While he is not absolutely immune from liability, Bottass does enjoy a qualified privilege.

Minnesota v. Weber

589 F. Supp. 2d 1170 · District Court, D. Minnesota · Dec 17, 2008

The parties agree that Weber qualifies as a federal officer for the purposes of § 1442(a)(1). … The court stated: [T]o establish ... a federal immunity defense — hence federal removal jurisdiction — growing out of an on-duty vehicular traffic accident, a federal officer must show that the accident resulted from an exigency

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.

Nickerson v. Gilbert

66 F.R.D. 593 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Apr 25, 1975

The defendants’ contention that they are entitled to a “qualified” immunity from suit because they acted in good faith and with a reasonable belief in the propriety of their conduct must be rejected. … ” immunity from suit.