Case law

Larpenter v. Vera

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Aug 12, 2022

“To defeat qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show that the official's conduct was objectively unreasonable in light of a clearly established rule of law.” Vincent v. … Callahan, the Supreme Court explained that an officer is “entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show that the conduct violated the Fourth Amendment.” 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009).

Herbert v. New Orleans City

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Aug 10, 2020

In striking this balance, qualified immunity shields “government officials performing discretionary functions” from civil liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Where a public official invokes qualified immunity as a defense to a civil action against him, the plaintiff has the burden of establishing a constitutional violation and overcoming the defense. Jackson v.

Todd v. State

685 So. 2d 313 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 21, 1997

that the finding is not clearly wrong." … We cannot say that the trial judge was clearly wrong in this determination.

Stelly v. Montgomery

347 So. 2d 1145 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jul 1, 1977

Such determination is clearly contrary to the sage reasoning announced in the early case of State ex rel . Lasserre v. … Such determination also clearly violates the cardinal rule predominant in all custody matters that the paramount consideration is always the welfare of the children."

Mitchell v. City of Central

District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Sep 17, 2021

“In determining whether an official enjoys immunity, we ask (1) whether the plaintiff has demonstrated a violation of a clearly established federal constitutional or statutory right and (2) whether the official's actions … As to the second prong, “ ‘[q]ualified immunity attaches when an official's conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Kisela v.

Christopher Cross, Inc. v. United States

363 F. Supp. 2d 855 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Aug 9, 2004

It is well established that “[t]he United States enjoys sovereign immunity from suit,” and that its “immunity can be waived only by act of Congress.” Rothe Dev. Corp. v. … The penalties in this case, assessed under 26 U.S.C. § 6656 and 26 U.S.C. § 4481 , do not qualify as deficiencies for which notices of deficiencies must be sent.

Cain v. Martin Marietta Corp.

537 So. 2d 294 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 16, 1988

He stated that the scope of the work performed by Combustion Engineering, Inc. was of such a specialized nature and of such heavy construction so as not to qualify as work customarily performed by Martin Marietta. … These facts establish an independent basis for the exclusive remedy of worker’s compensation benefits under Louisiana Revised Statute Title 23 Section 1061 and on this basis Martin Marietta’s customary performance of the

State v. Hollingsworth

292 So. 2d 516 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Mar 25, 1974

Defendant's reliance on Article 771 is clearly misplaced. Article 771 deals with admonition of the jury upon defendant's request. … Its only significance was in the State's procedure of establishing the chain of custody. There is absolutely no merit in these bills of exceptions.

Williams v. Attorney General State of Louisiana

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Feb 4, 2025

does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”65 The Supreme Court has made clear that qualified immunity functions as an immunity from suit, rather … And the claims the Court did consider failed based on the lack of a clearly established constitutional right to terminate child support duties. No amendment would change this.

Sevin v. Parish of Plaquemines

901 So. 2d 619 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 27, 2005

The testimony establishes that Mrs. … Clearly, the drop off in question satisfies the latter requirement.

State v. Fabre

525 So. 2d 1222 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 17, 1988

In that opinion, the court clearly set forth its intention to accept a plea that was "unqualified" strictly from the standpoint of State v. Crosby, supra . … However, a court is not prohibited from accepting a guilty plea that is so qualified.

De Sanchez v. Banco Central De Nicaragua

515 F. Supp. 900 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Apr 20, 1981

It was established abroad by a foreign bank; was to be advised abroad, to another foreign bank; and named a foreign beneficiary. … Clearly in the context of the sovereign immunity of the United States, official conduct is not immune from suit simply because it is “governmental.” Indian Towing Co. v.

Kihneman v. Humble Oil & Refining Company

312 F. Supp. 34 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Mar 31, 1970

The First Count alleged various facts that may or may not be established at the trial against Harang. … The legal conception of malice that defeats the qualified privilege “must be some motive inconsistent with the social policy which gives rise to privilege and which affords prima facie immunity to the defendant.

Parish of St. Charles v. R.H. Creager, Inc.

10 La.App. 5 Cir. 180 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 14, 2010

We further find that, in this case, the law provides no relief by ordinary means and such an outcome would clearly violate constitutional due process. … (A) No Immunity in Contract and Tort. Neither the state, a state agency, nor a political subdivision shall be immune from suit and liability in contract or for injury to person or property. (B) Waiver in Other Suits.

Conners v. Pohlmann

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Mar 29, 2021

“The second prong of the qualified immunity test is better understood as two separate inquiries: whether the allegedly violated constitutional rights were clearly established at the time of the incident; and, if … Becnel first argues she is entitled to qualified immunity because the law in this area is not clearly established. This argument is meritless.

Isadore v. Probe Offshore, LLC

815 So. 2d 876 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 2001

Isadore argues that it was clearly wrong for the trial court to ignore a contract, which makes specific reference to the Plant Site, in favor of two other contracts which make no reference to it. … Lindsey's statement, indicating that only the surface lease dealt with the land where the accident occurred, was clearly wrong.

Jones v. Gooden

District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Jun 30, 2025

Defendant’s Entitlement To Qualified Immunity Second, Defendant invokes qualified immunity as a defense to Plaintiffs excessive force claim. (See Doc. 106-2 at 6-14). … unreasonable in light of the law that was clearly established at the time of the actions complained of.

Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's v. Sea-Lar Management, Inc.

787 So. 2d 1069 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 9, 2001

The trial court held that the ten-year prescriptive period applicable to contracts applies: The decision to pursue a tort or contract claim was clearly elective on [the] part of plaintiff and Underwriters. … In Louisiana, it is well established that a party damaged by conduct arising out of contract may have a right to seek damages in tort and for breach of contract. State e[x] rel. Guste v.

State v. Wallace

25 So. 3d 720 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Nov 6, 2009

The Court described the 48-hour requirement as follows: Our task is to articulate more clearly the boundaries of what is permissible under the Fourth Amendment. … For this reason, such jurisdictions will be immune from systemic challenges.

Dixon v. Tucker

92 So. 3d 1100 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 16, 2012

clearly wrong. … |nA well established presumption exists that, in rear-end collisions, the following driver breached the standard of care set out in La. R.S. 32:81 and is presumed negligent. 2 Mart v.