Case law

Knox v. Genison

726 F. Supp. 195 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 1, 1989

Briggs, 475 U.S. 335 , 106 S.Ct. 1092 , 89 L.Ed.2d 271 (1986)) properly contrasts the Imbler-directed absolute immunity for prosecutors engaged in their prosecutorial functions with the merely “qualified immunity [that] provides … immunity defense if he procures false identification by unlawful means ..., for such activity violates clearly established constitutional principles.

Olveda v. United States

508 F. Supp. 255 · District Court, E.D. Texas · Feb 17, 1981

Olveda’s radiation exposure occurred in Colorado this Court must examine the law of Colorado to determine if the United States qualifies as a “statutory employer” and gains the resultant immunity. … Since this case is clearly dismissable on the “statutory employer” defense, the accrual issue need not be and is not reached. 3 . Complaint, Paragraph II at p. 1.

KERCADO-CLYMER v. City of Amsterdam

608 F. Supp. 2d 303 · District Court, N.D. New York · Apr 10, 2009

Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.” Pearson, 129 S.Ct. at 815-16 . … The issue of qualified immunity is decided as a matter of law, and plaintiffs failure to argue against qualified immunity is of no consequence.

Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Bureau of Land Management

562 F. Supp. 2d 159 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 27, 2008

There, the court stated that to qualify for the sovereign-immunity exception articulated in Thompson, a statute must evince clear congressional intent regarding retroactive application, either on its face or in its legislative … Such a finding certainly establishes a causal connection between the filing of the complaint and the release of documents.

Goodwin v. State Farm General Insurance Company

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 28, 2023

Stahl, 254 F.3d 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (dismissal required of in forma pauperis 11 proceedings which seek monetary relief from immune defendants); Cato v. … Ctr., 675 F.3d 1233, 1237 (9th Cir. 2012) (“To establish a prima facie case for 19 failure to accommodate under the ADA, Samper must show that (1) [s]he is disabled within the 20 meaning of the ADA; (2) [s]he is a qualified

Omar Ex Rel. Cannon v. Lindsey

328 F. Supp. 2d 1287 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 30, 2004

Thus, the crucial fact Plaintiff must establish at trial, and this issue *1294 will be addressed when the Court examines the pending motions for summary-judgment on the ground of qualified immunity, is that Defendants exercised … Again, because the question of Defendants' intent is dispositive of the qualified immunity issue, the Court will examine Defendants’ state of mind when it addresses the pending qualified immunity motions. 6 .

Roth v. Trump

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 21, 2021

“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 … The plaintiffs have not, however, pointed to a violation of any clearly established Fourth Amendment right that can overcome the defendants’ entitlement to qualified immunity.

J & a REALTY v. City of Asbury Park

763 F. Supp. 85 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 18, 1991

To fund its new sewer plant, the city passed a sewer ordinance which established a system for assessing property owners for sewer charges. … While Owen does not alter the qualified immunity available to governmental employees sued in their individual capacities, 445 U.S. at 638 n. 18, 100 S.Ct. at 1409 n. 18, J & A sues the individual defendants only in their

Pick v. American Medical Systems, Inc.

958 F. Supp. 1151 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Feb 27, 1997

He indicated repeatedly that he is not qualified to draw such a conclusion. … According'to him, it allows him to see the cells more clearly.

Giano v. Kelly

869 F. Supp. 143 · District Court, W.D. New York · Nov 16, 1994

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that even if this court found the review process unconstitutional, they are entitled to qualified immunity. … “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields state officials from liability where they did not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Wright, 21 F.3d

Bell v. Township of Concord

759 F. Supp. 2d 621 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 10, 2011

“[QJualified 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 would have … "Second, if the plaintiff has satisfied this first step, the court must decide whether the right at issue was 'clearly established’ at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.”

Wilson v. Wilson

416 F. Supp. 984 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 28, 1976

He has no intention to establish full-time residence in Oregon. In 1974 and 1975, plaintiff applied for admission to the Oregon bar. … However, it is not clear that the present statute grants absolute immunity. For example, the statute excepts from its grant of immunity one who commits perjury.

VanZandt v. Fish and Wildlife Service

524 F. Supp. 2d 239 · District Court, W.D. New York · Nov 29, 2007

Qualified Immunity In her argument for summary judgment, Kiley asserts that she is entitled to qualified immunity. Relying on Rapkin v. … Certainly she cannot contend that conversion is a reasonable action entitled to qualified immunity.

Shaw v. COOSA COUNTY COM'N.

434 F. Supp. 2d 1179 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Oct 26, 2005

To be eligible for qualified immunity, the official must first establish that he was performing a "discretionary function" at the time the alleged violation of federal law occurred. … defendant violated was "clearly established" at the time he did it.

Caldwell v. Hammonds

53 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 1999

Qualified immunity Qualified immunity protects an official from suits for damages in the performance of discretionary duties unless the official “ ‘knew or reasonably should have known that the action he took within his sphere … A transfer for such a reason would violate clearly established constitutional law, as the Defendants knew or should have known.

Jacobs v. Village of Ottawa Hills

159 F. Supp. 2d 693 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 24, 2001

Also, I found that Officers Miller and Knallay were not entitled to qualified immunity. (Id. at 16-19). Defendants appealed the denials of qualified immunity to the Sixth Circuit. … Unlike qualified immunity under federal law, the Ohio statutory immunity requires a certain state of mind.

Kennedy v. City of Braham

67 F. Supp. 3d 1020 · District Court, D. Minnesota · Dec 12, 2014

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from [personal] liability and the burdens of litigation ... unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable … Accordingly, at this stage of the proceedings — -where Plaintiff has adequately alleged the violation of a clearly established statutory right — Chief Knowles is.not entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs DPPA claims

Martin v. Memorial Hospital at Gulfport

881 F. Supp. 1087 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Mar 1, 1995

This was clearly established in Darlak v. … QUALIFIED IMMUNITY AS TO STATE LAW CLAIMS The doctrine of qualified immunity as to the state law claims is not a great deal different than the doctrine of qualified immunity as it relates to the due process claims.

Tolman v. Finneran

171 F. Supp. 2d 31 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 14, 2001

To do so, the candidate must receive a minimum number of “qualifying contributions.” … Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), the party invoking jurisdiction has the burden of proof to establish its existence. Murphy v. United States, 45 F.3d 520, 522 (1st Cir.1995).

District Counsel 33, American Federation of State County & Municipal Employees v. City of Philadelphia

944 F. Supp. 392 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 25, 1995

of lists of qualified candidates to be used to fill vacancies, 351 Pa.Code § 7.7-401(f). … Clearly, Plaintiffs’ unilateral belief that they were qualified and entitled to the promotions is insufficient to establish a constitutionally protected property interest in the promotions. 2 .