Case law

Knighton v. City of Syracuse Fire Department

145 F. Supp. 2d 217 · District Court, N.D. New York · May 15, 2001

In addition, to prevail on the claim against Cummings in his individual capacity, the Court must find that qualified immunity does not apply. " 'The qualified immunity doctrine protects government officials from suits seeking … "A government actor performing a discretionary task is entitled to immunity from § 1983 suits if either ‘(a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant

Swales v. Township of Ravenna

989 F. Supp. 925 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 20, 1997

A state official is entitled to qualified immunity when his conduct was objectively reasonable in light of clearly established rules and the information then possessed by the official. Id. (citing Anderson v. … Tishomingo County, 962 F.2d 501, 510 (5th Cir.1992) (When facts relied on to establish probable cause for arrest were in dispute, “[w]hether or not [defendant could] claim qualified immunity from [plaintiff’s] Fourth Amendment

Kissinger v. Fort Wayne Cmty. Sch.

293 F. Supp. 3d 796 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 26, 2018

Qualified Immunity for the Individual Defendants Whether government officials enjoy qualified immunity involves a two-part inquiry. … Bryan , 523 F.3d 789 , 802 (7th Cir. 2008) (a plaintiff seeking to defeat an assertion of qualified immunity must establish "that the law concerning the plaintiff's asserted right was clearly established at the time the challenged

Richardson v. Miles

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 21, 2025

Government officials like the Cook County correctional officers here are protected by qualified immunity “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … right; and [2] whether the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the officer’s alleged misconduct.”

Truss v. Collier

574 F. Supp. 1249 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 8, 1983

identified as unlawful____ If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct. … Herein the fleeing felon rule was clearly established law, in effect at the time of the shooting incident, and has been declared to be constitutional.

Ahanotu v. Massachusetts Turnpike Authority

466 F. Supp. 2d 378 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 8, 2006

Unless the plaintiffs allegations claim a violation of “clearly established” law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery. Id. … Immunity applies unless the facts establish that the alleged conduct violated a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation such that a reasonable officer would have known that the

Francis v. Marshall

684 F. Supp. 2d 897 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Feb 2, 2010

To determine whether qualified immunity applies, a court must decide whether (1) the facts that a plaintiff has alleged or shown make out a violation of a constitutional right and (2) the right at issue was “clearly established … Francis did not establish that Marshall violated any of his First Amendment rights and, consequently, he is entitled to qualified immunity.

Marryshow v. Town of Bladensburg

139 F.R.D. 318 · District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 31, 1991

The active Defendants may present, at trial, the defense of qualified immunity. See Anderson v. … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 638 , 107 S.Ct. 3034, 3038 , 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987) (government official performing discretionary function shielded from civil liability by qualified immunity where actions do not violate clearly established

Thomas v. Adams

55 F. Supp. 3d 552 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 20, 2014

Qualifíed Immunity The test governing the defense of qualified immunity is long-established: “Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional … right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”

Locurto v. Giuliani

95 F. Supp. 2d 161 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 27, 2000

An individual defendant sued for damages under § 1983 may be entitled to qualified immunity if it was objectively reasonable for him to conclude that his actions did not violate a clearly established constitutional right. … Since it was clearly established at the time the events in the instant action took place that before taking an adverse employment action a government employer was required to provide an employee with a hearing that comported

Owens v. City of Philadelphia

6 F. Supp. 2d 373 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 13, 1998

Qualified Immunity: Murphy also raises qualified immunity as a bar to. this suit. … Qualified Immunity. Nor, on this record, are Lewis, Robinson, and Russell entitled to qualified immunity.

Nagel v. City of Jamestown

326 F. Supp. 3d 897 · United States District Court · Aug 2, 2018

Qualified Immunity Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity to protect themselves from the burdens of litigation, unless they incompetently violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. *906 … As explained below, Edinger did not violate "clearly established" statutory or constitutional rights, and thus, he is entitled to qualified immunity. C.

Martin v. United States

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 27, 2025

The FTCA also does not waive the United States’ sovereign immunity as to Count Four. To establish jurisdiction under the FTCA, a plaintiff must “demonstrate that the claim asserted is the kind permitted by statute.” … Nor does Martin identify any new statutes that clearly waive the United States’ sovereign immunity for Counts Four and Five. For example, he cites 28 U.S.C. § 612.

Ross v. City University of New York

211 F. Supp. 3d 518 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 29, 2016

To establish a prima facie violation of the ADA or the Rehabilitation Act, plaintiff must show that 1) she is a qualified individual with a disability; 2) CUNY is an entity subject to the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act; and … Milliken in his official capacity under the exception to Eleventh Amendment immunity established in Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 , 28 S.Ct. 441 , 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908). (PL Mem. at 28 n.52.)

Weir v. Nix

890 F. Supp. 769 · District Court, S.D. Iowa · May 25, 1995

Qualified Immunity The defendants plead qualified immunity as an affirmative defense. “The qualified immunity inquiry involves a two-step process.” Munz v. Michael, 28 F.3d 795, 799 (8th Cir.1994). … Weir must first establish violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

Mills v. City of Harrisburg

589 F. Supp. 2d 544 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 2, 2008

Qualified immunity protects a law enforcement officer who has violated a plaintiff’s rights if the rights were not “clearly established” when the officer acted. … Accordingly, Bair and Blas-ko are entitled to qualified immunity. 9 .

Kritenbrink v. Crawford

457 F. Supp. 2d 1139 · District Court, D. Nevada · Oct 12, 2006

Qualified Immunity Defendants contend that they are also entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. In accordance with Saucier v. … Defendant Suwe is shielded from liability because he has qualified immunity and, under Saucier, qualified immunity is “an immunity from suit ”, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 (emphasis in original).

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).

Gibson v. County of Riverside

181 F. Supp. 2d 1057 · District Court, C.D. California · Jan 4, 2002

Unlike sections 818.2 and 821, which provide an absolute immunity, sections 820.4 and 820.6 provide a qualified immunity available in many circumstances but unavailable where the defendant public employee failed to use due … As the Court's analysis will make clear, sections 51 and 52 of the Unruh Act, when read together, clearly make such conduct actionable even though the individual or entity denying others access to a "business establishment

Summe v. KENTON COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE

626 F. Supp. 2d 680 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Jun 16, 2009

Eldridge entitled to qualified immunity on Summe’s § 1983 claim. … Qualified immunity provides that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate *688 clearly established statutory