Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.61s
3 F. Supp. 3d 746 · District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Feb 28, 2014
Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials from suit for “performing discretionary functions in the course of duty to the extent that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … Under the second prong, the plaintiff must show that “the right was clearly established.” Id. Whether a right was clearly established at the relevant time is a question of law, Lewis v.
Cited 1 timesPublished626 F. Supp. 2d 595 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · May 15, 2009
Defendants maintain that they did not violate Bellamy’s Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights, but even if they did they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not contravene any clearly established constitutional … immunity when there is a violation of clearly established federal law.
Cited 1 timesPublishedMitchell v. Township of Willingboro Municipality Government
913 F. Supp. 2d 62 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 28, 2012
The Third Circuit has clearly held that “qualified immunity will be upheld on a 12(b)(6) motion only when the immunity is established on the face of the complaint.” Thomas v. … Defendant Perez does not argue that Plaintiffs Fourth Amendment rights in this case were not clearly established. Consequently, the Plaintiffs complaint satisfies the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis.
Cited 24 timesPublished649 F. Supp. 2d 440 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Sep 2, 2009
who allegedly searched through Newhard’s phone after the arrest is entitled to qualified immunity because Newhard’s constitutional right to be free from such a search under the Fourth Amendment was not “clearly established … The Unnamed Officer who allegedly searched through the cell phone did not violate any “clearly established” constitutional right of New-hard’s under the Fourth Amendment and is thus entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 15 timesPublished899 F. Supp. 2d 1115 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Sep 27, 2012
Clearly Established Rights in the Qualifted Immunity Analysis. … The Supreme Court has clarified that the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity test is a very high burden for the plaintiff: “A Government official’s conduct violates clearly established law when, at the time
Cited 68 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jun 15, 2021
Qualified Immunity 22 Qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability where a reasonable officer would 23 not have known that his conduct violated a clearly established right. … established law.”). 24 Officer Wallace is not entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity 25 because, as established previously, there is a material issue of fact as to whether Officer Wallace 26
Cited 0 timesUnknownJanowski v. City of North Wildwood
259 F. Supp. 3d 113 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 5, 2017
“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 person … ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”).
Cited 61 timesPublished379 F. Supp. 3d 420 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 15, 2019
Borough of Nesquehoning , 905 F.3d 711 , 719 (3d Cir. 2018) (explaining that the qualified immunity inquiry was whether the right at issue in that case was clearly established at the time the alleged conduct occurred). … They argue that because it was not clearly established in 1992 that police officers had any Brady obligations, the Defendant detectives are entitled to qualified immunity. Id.
Cited 27 timesPublished294 F. Supp. 3d 548 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 20, 2018
In analyzing qualified immunity claims, the Supreme Court has "repeatedly told courts...to not define clearly established law at a high level of generality." Mullenix v. … In analyzing qualified immunity claims, the Supreme Court has "repeatedly told courts … to not define clearly established law at a high level of generality." Mullenix v.
Cited 6 timesPublishedTesla Inc. v. Louisiana Automobile Dealers Association
District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Mar 7, 2025
The Impact of Asserting Qualified Immunity on Discovery When dismissal is sought on the grounds of qualified immunity, however, a stay of discovery is virtually routine because a defendant pleading qualified … immunity operates to stay discovery only as to the defendants asserting qualified immunity, not to co-defendants or on other claims not subject to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Feb 19, 2025
1 parole revocation acts like a police officer applying for an arrest warrant and is therefore entitled 2 to qualified immunity); Thornton v. … arising from the duty to supervise parolees is 9 covered by qualified immunity[.]”). 10 Plaintiff’s allegations in both claims two and three that he has been arrested and returned
Cited 0 timesUnknown96 F. Supp. 3d 370 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 1, 2015
Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity “protects public officials performing discretionary functions from personal liability in a civil suit for damages ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Defendants’ entitlement to qualified immunity, therefore, turns on whether and when the rights that Hassell invokes were “clearly established.” Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 .
Cited 20 timesPublished20 F. Supp. 2d 296 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Aug 28, 1998
Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense shielding public officials from civil damages so long as their conduct does not violate any clearly-established statutory or constitutional right of which a … To determine whether Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity protection from the claims in Count I, we must determine whether the right claimed is a clearly-established one.
Cited 7 timesPublished980 F. Supp. 2d 214 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Oct 24, 2013
In determining whether qualified immunity shields a state actor from liability, courts look at 1) whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a constitutional right, and 2) whether the right at issue was clearly established … Taylor, 723 F.3d 91 (1st Cir.2013), and that the prohibition against “deliberately fabricating evidence and framing individuals for crimes they did not commit,” as alleged in this case, was clearly established as far back
Cited 2 timesPublished193 F. Supp. 3d 530 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Jun 16, 2016
Clearly Established Further, even if Hollandsworth used excessive force, she would still be entitled to qualified immunity because she did not violate a clearly established' constitutional right. … Clearly Established Law Alternatively, even if Gibson did use excessive force, he would still be entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate a clearly established constitutional right.
Cited 7 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 25, 2023
Qualified Immunity Finally, Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages when “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 31, 2021
In the familiar qualified immunity analysis, the court asks “(1) whether the officer violated a constitutional right, and (2) whether the right was clearly established, such that ‘it would [have … This though does not end this Court’s qualified immunity analysis.
Cited 0 timesUnknown310 F. Supp. 3d 581 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 19, 2018
In other words, he is entitled to qualified immunity if the constitutional right at issue was not clearly established. … In determining whether a constitutional right is clearly established or not for purposes of qualified immunity courts must consider whether "any reasonable official in the defendant's shoes would have understood that he was
Cited 53 timesPublished941 F. Supp. 1281 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 20, 1996
Since defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on their federal .claims, and Duca has not identified any distinct right clearly established by state law, defendants are also entitled to qualified immunity on his Massachusetts … As demonstrated in the present section of this opinion, the typical non-Fourth Amendment qualified immunity analysis focuses on whether the particular right implicated is "clearly established.”
Cited 10 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 10, 2024
that right was clearly established.” … [on] the clearly-established prong of the standard.”).
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna