Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.80s
Hojeije v. Department of Treasury
263 Mich. App. 295 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 19, 2004
In Saucier, supra at 201-202, the United States Supreme Court described the following standards for applying the protection of qualified immunity: A court required to rule upon the qualified immunity-issue must consider . … Stated slightly differently, the plaintiff attempting to overcome qualified immunity in a § 1983 action bears the burden of establishing that a “reasonable official in the defendant[’s] position could [not] have believed
Cited 5 timesPublished2025 Ark. App. 200 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 9, 2025
Under that standard, a state official is entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the plaintiff has alleged facts that demonstrate the deprivation of an actual constitutional right, and (2) the right was clearly established … Our supreme court has said that individual state actors are entitled to statutory immunity unless they transgress “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”
Cited 1 timesPublishedCity of Gary v. Smith & Wesson Corp.
126 N.E.3d 813 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 23, 2019
We conclude as follows: (1) the City’s lawsuit is not an unlawful attempt to regulate firearms; (2) the City has failed to establish that the Amendment is unconstitutional; (3) the Immunity Statute does … A qualified civil liability action does not include (iii) an action in which a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product knowingly violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or
Cited 5 timesPublished741 So. 2d 975 · Court of Appeals of Mississippi · Jun 22, 1999
There is a qualified immunity under section 1983 jurisprudence *983 for government officials performing discretionary functions unless a reasonable person would have known that their conduct violated a clearly established … To determine whether this immunity applies, the first step is to decide whether the plaintiff has alleged that a clearly established constitutional right was violated.
Cited 2 timesPublishedWright v. Over-The-Road & City Transfer Drivers, Local Union No. 41
945 S.W.2d 481 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 25, 1997
In defamation cases, this jurisdiction has traditionally eschewed absolute immunity in favor of qualified immunity. … As a consequence, we find the Union sufficiently established its right to claim qualified immunity in the case at bar.
Cited 23 timesPublishedCovington v. McNEESE STATE UNIVERSITY
996 So. 2d 667 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 5, 2008
XI immunity. McNeese's sole "argument" against waiver is that "McNeese does not waive its right to immunity under the Eleventh Amendment." … Shamieh's records clearly note that Covington, at times, suffers from memory dysfunction.
Cited 34 timesPublished17 S.W.3d 268 · Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · May 11, 2000
s assertion of qualified or official immunity in order for the sovereign. … To the extent that Aguilar’s argument on appeal is based on qualified immunity, we aré unable to consider it as he did not raise the issues of res judicata or collateral estoppel within an argument of qualified immunity in
Cited 6 timesPublished332 N.J. Super. 169 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 20, 2000
As to the officers' claims of qualified immunity, such a defense must be analyzed in terms of whether clearly established law was violated and whether a reasonable person in the officers' position would have known that clearly … Allowing for the possibility that defendants Beard and Iannicelli violated clearly established law, an issue we believe that must be informed by a proper factual record, in order to avail themselves of qualified immunity
Cited 5 timesPublished2014 Ohio 5572 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 2014
However, the trial court did err in denying Shott qualified immunity under 42 U.S.C. 1983. … This right is known in law as qualified immunity.” Cook at 85.
Cited 4 timesPublished199 Ga. App. 763 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · May 1, 1991
As to the ground of qualified immunity, the trial court ruled that appellant failed to clearly establish a violation of constitutional principles, again citing Chief Judge Tjoflat’s special concurrence in Lee v. … not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’
Cited 10 timesPublished859 S.W.2d 586 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 29, 1993
The first element of qualified immunity is established. … The second element of qualified immunity is proven. Finally, the summary proof establishes that the Harassed reported the incidents of sexual harassment in good faith.
Cited 8 timesPublishedTexas Department of Public Safety v. Salazar
304 S.W.3d 896 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Feb 25, 2010
Salazar, Soria, and Trejo have presented no evidence that they are otherwise qualified or eligible for a promotion to the position of foreman. … Code Ann. § 521.123 (West 2007) (requiring Department to "orient the information on the license to clearly distinguish the [under 21] license from a license that is issued to a person who is 21 years of age or older”). 6
Cited 61 timesPublished512 A.2d 249 · Superior Court of Delaware · Apr 29, 1986
Senior Judge Latchum held that under well-established federal deci-sional law, a judge is absolutely immune from civil suits for conduct arising from his judicial acts except “where there is clearly no jurisdiction over the … Defendant Haller’s immunity, unlike that of defendants Tease and Witsil, is qualified rather than absolute.
Cited 7 timesPublished105 Or. App. 376 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 23, 1991
Two types of official immunity are recognized in claims under section 1983: qualified and absolute. Qualified *382 immunity is the norm for state executive officials, such as prosecutors. … or qualified immunity.
Cited 21 timesPublishedCounty of Butte v. Superior Court
175 Cal. App. 4th 729 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 1, 2009
In those situations, the law clearly contemplates the destruction of the subject marijuana. ...[][] But neither of those circumstances exist here. … The Supreme Court in Mower determined the Act does not afford qualified medical marijuana patients a complete immunity from arrest because of their status as patients.
Cited 12 timesPublished2025 Pa. Super. 198 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 9, 2025
Grant of a motion for judgment on the pleadings is proper “only when the moving party’s right to succeed is certain and the case is so free from doubt that the trial would clearly be a fruitless exercise.” Id. … Defendants contend that - 13 - J-A17017-25 the PREP Act establishes a liberal causation standard to invoke immunity, requiring only that a covered countermeasure has “played some
Cited 0 timesPublished562 S.W.3d 696 · Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo) · Oct 9, 2018
The evidence presented does not clearly and specifically establish which referrals or procedures Dr. Batra lost due to the adverse report. … As discussed earlier, the evidence presented by Covenant negated actual malice; therefore, Covenant established that it was entitled to a qualified immunity defense as to all claims.
Cited 52 timesPublished191 Ohio App. 3d 816 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 16, 2010
absolute, qualified, etc.) and identify what facts establish the defense.” {¶ 5} In response, the city objected on the basis that the requests were vague and overbroad, and furthermore that Civ.R. 26 “does not allow for … defense by its type (i.e., absolute, qualified, etc.) and identify what facts establish the defense” is beyond the scope of Civ.R. 26.
Cited 4 timesPublishedKubik v. New York State Department of Social Services
244 A.D.2d 606 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 6, 1997
However, the record clearly established that Jennifer was back in Kubik’s home when “the report of suspected child abuse or maltreatment” was made on February 19, 1991. … As Martin is a police officer, his affidavit is entitled to a qualified immunity (see, Hunter v Bryant, 502 US 224, 227 ).
Cited 12 timesPublished302 Ga. App. 854 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Mar 17, 2010
Under the doctrine of official, or qualified, immunity, law enforcement officers may be personally liable for negligent actions taken in the performance of ministerial functions, but are immune from personal liability for … Thus, while it is unclear exactly what Middlebrooks held generally concerning the waiver of sovereign immunity as to a claim asserting an alleged violation of the right to medical care, it, as well as Howard , clearly held
Cited 31 timesPublished
Ask Donna