Case law

DONNA SMITHERS v. TA'TANISHA TWEEDY

Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jun 24, 2025

“The doctrine of official immunity, also known as qualified immunity, offers public officers and employees limited protection from suit in their personal capacity.” (Citation omitted.) Siegrist v. Herhold, 365 Ga. … “Under Georgia law, official or qualified immunity is an entitlement not to stand trial rather than a mere defense to liability.

Texas Department of Criminal Justice and Glenda Pierson v. Linda Thomas as Personal Representative for the Estate of Damon Hollimon, and Ashley Dominique Hollimon

Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Apr 19, 2007

from suit, and Pierson's motion for summary judgment asserted qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity shields an official performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages under section 1983, provided the official's conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional

Spencer v. King County

39 Wash. App. 201 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 17, 1984

State officials are afforded a qualified immunity from liability under section 1983 insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established federal statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … At a minimum, the constitutional rights asserted by Spencer were not "clearly established" at the time of the challenged conduct.

Lloyd v. Stone Harbor

179 N.J. Super. 496 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 1, 1981

In the present case the individual defendants are not protected by the defense of qualified immunity. … As noted, under Monell and Owen, supra, municipalities have no immunity in suits commenced under the federal Civil Rights Act; individuals have qualified immunity.

Kirby v. County of Fresno

242 Cal. App. 4th 940 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 1, 2015

County contends that the CUA and the MMP provide a limited immunity from prosecution under state statutes, but provide no immunity from prosecution pursuant to a local law such as County’s. … The provision clearly states that such possession must be “consistent with this article”—that is, consistent with the MMP.

Albright v. Texas Department of Human Services

859 S.W.2d 575 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Jul 29, 1993

Clearly, the legislature contemplated that summary judgment is the appropriate procedure in which to determine official immunity. And in his concurrence in Travis v. … School Dist., 894 F.2d 174 , 177 (5th Cir.1990) (because the defense of qualified immunity is immunity from suit, which extends beyond just a defense to include all aspects of civil litigation, qualified immunity questions

N.E., as Legal Guardian for Infant J v. v. State of

449 N.J. Super. 379 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 4, 2017

Objective reasonableness will be established if the actor's conduct did not violate a clearly established constitutional or statutory right. Gormley v. … A defendant who cannot establish that his or her conduct was objectively reasonable may still invoke qualified immunity if his or her actions were carried out in good faith.

Hall v. ACME MARKETS, INC.

110 Pa. Commw. 199 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 9, 1987

Commonwealth, 481 Pa. 540 , 393 A.2d 293 (1978), held that officials are protected by a qualified immunity. … Id. at 545 , 393 A.2d at 295 . 2 Section 1 of the Act of May 18, 1923, P.L. 259. 3 In Witt , this court held that consecutive Secretaries of Banking were protected from suit by the immunity established in *206 DuBree .

Pine v. Synkonis

79 Pa. Commw. 479 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 11, 1984

There was also evidence that damaged or missing guardrail had been left unrepaired for an extended period of time. 3 Qualified immunity Initially we must determine whether the Appellants are protected by the qualified immunity … In DuBree , the Court 4 analyzed prior law governing official immunity and established considerations for determining whether an official should be immune. These can be summarized as follows: 1.

Cody v. Dane County

242 Wis. 2d 173 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · Jan 25, 2001

In this regard, Cody misapprehends the concept of qualified immunity in the § 1983 context. … The determinative legal question regarding qualified immunity is not whether Norwick reasonably believed his actions were lawful, but whether the law regarding Cody's rights was clearly established, such that "a reasonably

Szuch v. FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co.

2016 Ohio 620 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 19, 2016

Nuisance may be further divided into “absolute” and “qualified.” … . {¶ 54} Alternatively, appellants argue that the operation of the range above the noise regulations is evidence of negligence sufficient to establish a qualified nuisance.

Grignano v. City of Milford

106 Conn. App. 648 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Apr 1, 2008

Because the parties in the present matter assume that the immunity provided by § 52-557n (a) (2) (B) is identical to a municipal employee’s qualified immunity for discretionary acts at common law, we also assume, without … Under the common law, “a municipal employee is liable for the misperformance of ministerial acts, but has a qualified immunity in the performance of governmental acts. . . .

Francisco Entila Et Al., Appellants, v. Gerald Cook Et Al., Respondents

190 Wash. App. 477 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 5, 2015

Given the legislative policy favoring third-party actions, one would expect any expansion of immunity to be clearly stated. Entila relies on Olson v. … To establish immunity, Cook must show that he was doing work for Boeing at the time of the accident.

Barber v. Lynch

275 Pa. Super. 333 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 7, 1980

and qualified privilege or immunity. … The preliminary objections of Appellees do not specifically use the term “qualified privilege” or “qualified immunity”.

People v. Trinity Holistic Caregivers, Inc.

239 Cal. App. Supp. 4th 9 · Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California · Aug 20, 2015

Nothing in the definition requires the other MMB within LAMC section 45.19.6.3’s 600-foot radius to be one which qualifies for immunity. … “permanently” disqualify the otherwise qualified MMB from obtaining immunity.

Dear v. City of Irving

902 S.W.2d 731 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 16, 1995

“This immunity, variously known as governmental, official, quasi-judicial or qualified immunity, evolved out of a public policy that encourages public officers to carry out their duties without fear of personal liability. … Under federal law, the defense of qualified immunity applies only if the officer’s actions involved the exercise of discretionary duties. See Streetman v. Jordan, 918 F.2d 555, 556 (5th Cir.1990).

Malik Muntaqim, Adc No. 088633 v. James Gibson, Warden, Varner Unit, Arkansas Division of Correction

2024 Ark. App. 456 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 25, 2024

in their individual are entitled to qualified immunity. … Under this analysis, a state official is entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff has alleged facts that demonstrate (1) the deprivation of an actual constitutional right and (2) that the right was clearly established

Hickey v. Zezulka

177 Mich. App. 606 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 19, 1989

good faith or qualified immunity against plaintiffs claim pursuant to 42 USC 1983. … Moreover, even if the qualified immunity defense had been pled by Zezulka, qualified immunity is not available in this case because Zezulka was not performing a discretionary act.

Pinal County v. Cooper

238 Ariz. 346 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Oct 20, 2015

Qualified immunity is unavail *350 able if the official “knew or should have known that he was acting in violation of established law or acted in reckless disregard of whether his activities would deprive another person of … “Thus, in a defamation ease, qualified immunity will protect a public official if the facts establish that a reasonable person, with the information available to the official, ‘could have formed a reasonable belief that the

Salazar v. Bjork

85 N.M. 94 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Mar 23, 1973

However, we do believe that the facts of this case give rise to a qualified immunity. … Ares, 29 N.M. 418 , 223 P. 766 (1924) have used the term “qualified privilege” where we have used the words “qualified immunity”.