Case law

Schmidt v. Midwest Family Mutual Insurance Co.

426 N.W.2d 870 · Supreme Court of Minnesota · Aug 5, 1988

The insurance policy between Midwest and Schmidt may not technically qualify as a contract of adhesion. Nevertheless, it possesses some earmarks of an adhesive contract. … The public policy of this state favoring the employment of arbitration is clearly and firmly established in our law. By our decisions it antedated the UAA. By enactment of the UAA it has been legislatively endorsed.

City of Saint Albans v. Botkins

228 W. Va. 393 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 23, 2011

As to the second step of the qualified immunity inquiry— whether the constitutional standards were clearly established at the time in question— the Ninth Circuit concluded it should be answered by applying the same test the … Is there qualified immunity?

Robinson v. Beaumont

291 Ark. 477 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 16, 1987

This immunity is guaranteed so long as the actions do not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … If the complaint fails to state a claim of violation of clearly established law the defense of qualified immunity is appropriate and the suit should not be allowed to proceed.

Deputy J.K. Maston v. Thomas Jefferson Wagner

236 W. Va. 488 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 10, 2015

the involved conduct did not violate clearly established laws of which a reasonable official would have known.”).9 A public officer is entitled to qualified immunity for discretionary acts, even if committed negligently … A litigant may pierce the shield of qualified immunity by showing that a government official has violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right.

In re Masterson

503 S.W.3d 412 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 15, 2016

(explaining that “ ‘an issue of first impression can sometimes qualify for mandamus relief when the factual scenario has never been, precisely addressed but the principle of law has been clearly established’ ”) (quoting In … Weeks, 391 S.W.3d 117, 122 (Tex.Crim.App.2013)), ■ To establish the second of the two requirements for obtaining a writ of prohibition, a relator must demonstrate the absence of an adequate remedy at law.

Eric Morillo v. Monmouth County Sheriff's

222 N.J. 104 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 13, 2015

Qualified immunity shields officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages where their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Ed. 2d at 866- 67 (reiterating that qualified immunity protects public officials from suit for violations of clearly established statutory or constitutional rights unless action was plainly incompetent or knowing violation

Birbiglia v. Saint Vincent Hospital, Inc.

427 Mass. 80 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 16, 1998

Geltman, 406 Mass. 811, 816-817 [1990]) would not be thereby shown to have failed to qualify for immunity. … The specific intent that would be required to establish that the action of the board violated any duty of good faith and fair dealing cannot be established by aggregating the knowledge of all hospital employees acting within

People v. Bylsma

493 Mich. 17 · Michigan Supreme Court · Dec 19, 2012

However, a defendant need not establish the elements of § 4 immunity in order establish the elements of a § 8 defense. 1. … Rather, in People v Kolanek, we held that a defendant need not establish the elements of § 4 immunity in order to establish the elements of the § 8 defense.4 Accordingly, we reverse the Court of Appeals’ judgment to the

Guider v. Smith

431 Mich. 559 · Michigan Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1988

clearly established at the time in question. … If the undisputed facts show that the defendant’s conduct violated no clearly established constitutional standards, qualified immunity applies as a matter of law.

CLARK CNTY. v. DIST. CT. (EGGLESTON)

141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 31 · Nevada Supreme Court · Jun 12, 2025

Granting summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds is appropriate where the defendant's conduct did not violate any clearly established constitutional law. See White u. … Eggleston has not met the exacting "clearly established" standard required to defeat qualified immunity on this point.

W. Va. State Police, Corporal R.D. Eshbaugh v. Victoria Hughes, Administratrix

238 W. Va. 406 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jan 26, 2017

involved conduct did not violate clearly established laws of which a reasonable official would have known.”). 7 Maston v. … The record clearly establishes that the November Troopers searched the quarry, and in that search found and recovered some of Mr. Hughes’s remains.

Guy v. Wyo. Dep't of Corr.

444 P.3d 652 · Wyoming Supreme Court · Jul 9, 2019

Thus, we will address the Defendants' argument that they are entitled to qualified immunity. *659 [¶19] "Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability if their conduct does not violate clearly established … To overcome qualified immunity, the alleged right at issue must be "clearly established," such that it is "beyond debate." See, e.g. , Dist. of Columbia v.

Dorothy King v. Virginia Betts

354 S.W.3d 691 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Nov 18, 2011

medications violated a clearly established right. … an otherwise clearly established law). .

Kirk v. City of Newark

109 N.J. 173 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 25, 1988

Thus, the qualified-immunity defense would be lost if the official knew or reasonably should have known that his or her action would violate plaintiffs clearly established constitutional rights or if he or she maliciously … For Kirk to defeat Cardillo’s assertion of the defense of qualified immunity, Kirk must show that the law was clearly established at the time of the incident.

W. Va. Board of Education and L. Wade Linger, Jr. v. Jorea M. Marple

236 W. Va. 654 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 10, 2015

Marple has not identified a clearly established right that was violated by the discretionary actions of the Board or Mr. Linger, her suit is precluded by qualified immunity. A. … the constitutional standards clearly established at the time[?]”

Baldridge v. Cordes

350 Ark. 114 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 26, 2002

Qualified Immunity A motion for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity is precluded only when the plaintiff has asserted a constitutional violation, demonstrated the constitutional right is clearly established and … Thus, an official is immune from suit if his actions did not violate clearly established principles of law of which a reasonable person would have knowledge. Virden v.

People of Michigan v. Robert Tuttle

498 Mich. 192 · Michigan Supreme Court · Jul 27, 2015

not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. … required to establish immunity.

Jason Moorhead v. West Virginia Army National Guard and West Virginia Mountaineer Challenge Academy

West Virginia Supreme Court · May 2, 2025

Clearly Established Rights or Laws Petitioner alleges that three different clearly established laws or rights were violated by the cadre that should strip Respondents of qualified immunity: (1) MCA’s safety … established rights or laws, we find none that strip Respondents of qualified immunity on these facts.

Baker v. Chaplin

517 N.W.2d 911 · Supreme Court of Minnesota · Jun 30, 1994

Id. at 396 , 109 S.Ct. at 1872 . 5 Many courts have found the law prohibiting excessive force to be clearly established *915 for qualified immunity purposes. See, e.g., Street v. … as asserted by the defendant, the defendant's actions violated clearly established law and are therefore not within the scope of the qualified immunity.

Losleben v. Oppedahl

319 Mont. 269 · Montana Supreme Court · Jan 28, 2004

Did the District Court err in granting Defendant Capp qualified immunity on the basis that it was not clearly established at the time of Losleben’s discharge from employment that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection … , Capp was entitled to qualified immunity