Case law

Sweeney v. Athens Regional Medical Center

705 F. Supp. 1556 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Feb 3, 1989

The court went on to state that to be entitled to state action immunity, a municipality need only show that it acted pursuant to a clearly articulated state policy. Id. … Even assuming that ARMC was acting pursuant to a clearly established policy or custom that had been adopted and promulgated by a final decision-maker at the time it denied Ms.

Niemann v. Whalen

911 F. Supp. 656 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 2, 1996

Qualified Immunity Defendant Whalen also seeks summary judgment on the ground of quali- *673 fled immunity. … Police officers, like other public officials, “are immune from § 1983 civil rights suits ... when their ‘conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

Powell v. Fournet

846 F. Supp. 1443 · District Court, D. Colorado · Mar 17, 1994

’s alleged conduct violated the law *1449 and that the law was clearly established when the alleged violation occurred. … that no material facts remain in dispute that would defeat his claim for qualified immunity.

Killarney v. Laperla

559 F. Supp. 499 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 18, 1983

In that case, the Court held that government officials are immune from personal liability for unconstitutional conduct insofar as their conduct was objectively reasonable as measured by reference to clearly established law … Prior to Harlow , the established standard for qualified or “good faith” immunity was two-pronged, bifurcating the concept of good faith on the part of the officers into an objective and subjective component.

Ortiz v. Holmes

157 F. Supp. 3d 692 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 18, 2016

The motion also raised several immunity arguments, claiming that the various defendants were entitled to quasi-judicial, qualified, and/or sovereign immunity. … The second factor clearly, weighs in favor of sovereign immunity. 3.

Assaad-Faltas v. University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences

708 F. Supp. 1026 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 1, 1989

Thus, even if the allegations of the complaint are taken as true, defendants are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity from damages. … , sovereign immunity under the Arkansas Constitution and law, and qualified “good faith” immunity. (3) All defamation claims and breach of privacy claims are dismissed as true statements or privileged comments. (4) Claims

Powers-Bunce v. District of Columbia

479 F. Supp. 2d 146 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 2007

Indeed, the assertion of a qualified immunity defense significantly changes and complicates the analysis that the Court must perform in the context of these motions to dismiss. … Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 306 , 116 S.Ct. 834 , 133 L.Ed.2d 773 (1996) (“Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal

Ruscavage v. Zuratt

821 F. Supp. 1078 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 30, 1993

Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to immunity from damages for civil rights violations “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity from damages because he acted in bad faith to retaliate against Plaintiff. *1084 D.

Allen v. Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

488 F. Supp. 2d 450 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 14, 2007

In her capacity as police officer and complaining witness, Hopkins is, at best, entitled to qualified immunity. See Kalina v. … No. 20, ¶¶ 9, 31-33) are problematic to an assertion of qualified immunity.

Ileto v. Glock, Inc.

421 F. Supp. 2d 1274 · District Court, C.D. California · Mar 14, 2006

The PLCAA provides immunity to firearms manufacturers and dealers from any lawsuit, pending or otherwise, fitting the Act’s definition of a “qualified civil liability action.” Id. §§ 7902-03. … Indeed, the Court devoted a very considerable amount of time and energy to determining whether, in fact, this case fell within the predicate exception to the PLCAA’s definition of a "qualified civil immunity action.”

Armster v. City of Riverside

611 F. Supp. 103 · District Court, C.D. California · May 1, 1985

The test to determine whether a defendant may assert a “good faith” or “qualified immunity” defense is a purely objective one based on whether the conduct complained of violated “ ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional … “Whether the official may prevail in his qualified immunity defense depends upon the ‘objective reasonableness of [his] conduct as measured by reference to clearly established law.’ ” Id.

Bagley v. Kolb

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Aug 3, 2021

However, Kolb may still be entitled to qualified immunity if Bagley cannot show that Kolb’s conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law. … Clearly Established Kolb may still be entitled to qualified immunity, unless case law had established that his conduct violated the Fourth Amendment as of January 6, 2018.

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.

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

Reavis v. Metropolitan Property & Liability Insurance

117 F.R.D. 160 · District Court, S.D. California · Aug 7, 1987

Therefore, this Court concludes that all the documents sought to be produced have a qualified immunity under the work-product doctrine. … In the particular circumstances of this case Reavis has made a sufficient showing of substantial need and undue hardship to overcome the qualified immunity from dis- *164 covery for non-mental impression work product.

Kapar v. Islamic Replublic of Iran

105 F. Supp. 3d 99 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 22, 2015

and execution absent a waiver of foreign sovereign immunity. … Reference to Section 1605A in Section 1610(g)’s attachment provision is quite clearly a benefit provided by the law.

Harden v. Peck

686 F. Supp. 1254 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 11, 1988

Peck: Qualified Immunity The plaintiffs argue that Peck is not entitled to qualified immunity for two reasons: first, because no reasonably competent police officer in Peck’s position would have concluded that the factual … We hold that the Peck is protected from suit by the doctrine of qualified immunity. B.

Lane v. Burrow

192 F. Supp. 3d 1253 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Jun 14, 2016

The Eleventh Circuit also concluded that even if a constitutional violation had occurred, Franks would be entitled to qualified immunity because that right was not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … immunity from the claim against him in his individual capacity because Lane’s First Amendment right was not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Taylor v. Davidson County Sheriff's Office

District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Jun 13, 2022

entitlement to qualified immunity. … clearly established rights.

Jones v. Westchester County

182 F. Supp. 3d 134 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 30, 2016

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that the individual Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. (Defs.’ Mem. 20.) … Jan. 27, 2016) (“The claim may not be. dismissed on qualified immunity grounds because [the plaintiff] sufficiently alleged a claim of excessive force and the right to be free from excessive force is clearly established,”