Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.50s
Day v. Idaho Transportation Department
Idaho Supreme Court · Aug 14, 2023
Auth., 124 Idaho 450, 463, 860 P.2d 653, 666 (1993) (“[E]ven though the district 14 court did not explicitly address the qualified immunity issue in responding to Worrell … ’s motions to dismiss and post-trial motions, it is implicit in the court’s rulings that it rejected Worrell’s properly raised immunity claims.”).
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Mississippi · May 10, 2023
Clifton, 29 F.3d 1012 (5th Cir. 1994) (holding that law enforcement officers are entitled to qualified immunity “unless it is shown that, at the time of the incident, [the officer] violated a clearly established constitutional … Villarreal, 628 F.3d 209, 211-12 (5th Cir. 2010) (“the plaintiff has the burden to rebut this [qualified immunity] defense by establishing that the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law”
Cited 0 timesUnknown110 F.3d 1098 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 9, 1997
Therefore, the determination of the state court represented neither an unreasonable interpretation of the facts nor an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. V. … Mindful that we must honor this determination unless it constitutes an “unreasonable application” of clearly established federal law, we conclude that Carter’s confession was voluntary.
Vacated on other grounds by Carter v. Johnson, 522 U.S. 964 (1997)Cited 48 timesPublishedPowell v. Georgia Department of Human Resources
114 F.3d 1074 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 29, 1997
In order to strip the appellees of their qualified immunity defense, Powell must demonstrate that the appellees violated clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … Because the appellees have invoked the defense of qualified immunity, Powell must prove a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.
Cited 17 timesPublishedGill v. United States of America
District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 21, 2019
The manner in which courts are permitted to resolve qualified-immunity defenses protects from unnecessary constitutional conjecture: “[C]ourts may grant qualified immunity on the ground that a purported right was not ‘clearly … To begin, the named Marshals are clearly entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutional questions in this case fall well short of being “clearly established.”
Cited 0 timesPublishedMicah Jessop v. City of Fresno
936 F.3d 937 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 4, 2019
Assuming that to be true, however, the City Officers are entitled to qualified immunity because that right was not clearly established. … As the panel opinion acknowledges, the lack of clearly established law at the time of the incident compels the conclusion that the City Officers are entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 52 timesPublishedKimberlin, Brett C. v. Quinlan, Michael J.
207 F.3d 667 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 28, 1999
qualified immunity issue. … to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesPublished73 F.3d 1365 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 2, 1996
established as to overcome the defense of qualified immunity. … established constitutional right which would overcome a qualified immunity defense.
Cited 178 timesPublished887 F.3d 744 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 12, 2018
Qualified immunity shields public officials from civil liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless their actions violate clearly established rights “of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”
Cited 139 timesPublishedThomas Hobgood v. Illinois Gaming Board
731 F.3d 635 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 16, 2013
Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitu- tional rights of which a reasonable person would have … The defendants argue that they are immune because Hobgood did not have a clearly estab- lished right to deliver confidential information to Gnutek, but their argument is irrelevant to the issue of qualified immunity.
Cited 148 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Mississippi · Sep 11, 2024
on violations of clearly established law. … This court is far from alone in expressing concerns regarding the qualified immunity doctrine, in particular its “clearly established” prong.
Cited 0 timesUnknownCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Sep 24, 2010
PURNELL may propound clearly established law for purposes of deter- mining qualified immunity. … clearly established.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · May 31, 2022
’s conduct was, “as a matter of law,” “objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law,” Cantrell, 666 F.3d at 921; Kinney v. … Bay City, Tex., 227 F.3d 316, 320–24 (5th Cir. 2000) (addressing whether there was clearly-established law). But see Colston v.
Cited 0 timesUnknown949 F.2d 352 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 15, 1991
Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), the Court adopted an objective standard for qualified immunity. … that law was clearly established when the alleged violation occurred.”
Cited 45 timesPublished47 F.3d 1427 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 9, 1995
Justice Scalia’s opinion for the Court turned to the element of “clearly established law.” … applicable law is and whether it was clearly established when the action occurred.
Cited 462 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 14, 2020
Qualified Immunity 18 Qualified immunity applies when an official's conduct does not violate clearly established 19 statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … City of Roseville, 882 F.3d 843, 856-57 (9th Cir. 2018) (noting that Ninth Circuit 3 precedent is sufficient to meet the “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity).
Cited 0 timesUnknown178 F.3d 1007 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 2, 1999
Pelletier, it stated that precedent "clearly establishes that an order rejecting the defense of qualified immunity at either the dismissal stage or the summary-judgment stage is a 'final' judgment subject to immediate appeal … believed their conduct did not violate clearly established law); Miller v.
Cited 43 timesPublished605 F. App'x 559 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 25, 2015
Beyond this, the court added, the undisputed evidence establishes that the two officers had acted reasonably and thus were entitled to qualified immunity. II. … As a fallback these defendants invoke qualified immunity, but their argument is feeble.
Cited 4 timesPublishedHawker v. Sandy City Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 5, 2014
“When a defendant asserts qualified immunity at summary judgment, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right and (2) the constitutional right was clearly established … But because the Supreme Court has broken down the burden of plaintiffs in a qualified immunity case into two prongs—a constitutional violation and clearly established law—courts often mistakenly grant qualified immunity to
Cited 0 timesPublished857 F. Supp. 741 · District Court, D. Hawaii · Jul 11, 1994
Common sense dictates that a right cannot be both “clearly established” and “previously undecided” for qualified immunity purposes. … established in order to deny qualified immunity.
Cited 8 timesPublished
Ask Donna