Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1908

10,000+ results

4.37s

  • Stearns v. Clarkson

    615 F.3d 1278 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 13, 2010

    Clearly Established Rights The district court correctly noted that the rights at issue in this case are clearly established. … Because the rights at issue in this case are clearly established, the defendants are only entitled to qualified immunity if, based on the facts as viewed in the light most favorable to Mr.

    Cited 76 timesPublished
  • Doe v. Woodard

    912 F.3d 1278 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 3, 2019

    We reversed the district court’s grant of qualified immunity. … I first address the “clearly established” prong. McCoy v. Meyers, 887 F.3d 1034, 1045 (10th Cir. 2018) (“Courts have discretion to decide the order in which to engage the two qualified immunity prongs.”

    Cited 180 timesPublished
  • Winfield v. State

    172 Vt. 591 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Jun 8, 2001

    Thus, if the official’s conduct does not violate clearly-established rights of which a reasonable person would have known, the official is protected by qualified immunity from tort liability. Cook v. … Assessed in light of these standards, the trial court’s ruling on the issue of qualified immunity was sound.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Williams v. O'Brien

    78 Mass. App. Ct. 169 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Oct 25, 2010

    It is well established that the MCRA incorporates the standard of immunity for public officials developed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , and accordingly “public officials are not liable under the [MCRA] for their discretionary … acts, unless they have violated a right under Federal or State constitutional or statutory law that was ‘clearly established’ at the time.”

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • BORONDY v. DRAHER

    District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 10, 2022

    A right is clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity where: (1) "a closely analogous case establishes that the conduct is unconstitutional"; or (2) "the violation is so obvious that a reasonable state actor … Ct. 577, 590 (2018) (constitutional right is clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity analysis if "every reasonable official would interpret [then-existing precedent] to establish the particular rule the plaintiff

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Buonocore v. Harris

    65 F.3d 347 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Sep 12, 1995

    established’ for qualified immunity purposes.” … They do broadly assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the right “allegedly violated” was not “clearly established.” Appellants’ Brief at 20 (emphasis added).

    Cited 111 timesPublished
  • Orozco v. Sandoval County

    District Court, D. New Mexico · Aug 27, 2020

    clearly established. … Therefore, in light of Plaintiff's failure to cite to clearly established law, the Court holds that Edwards is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Yorzinski v. City of New York

    175 F. Supp. 3d 69 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 31, 2016

    Qualified Immunity Police officers are immune from liability in § 1983 in suits brought against them in their individual capacities if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … The Second Circuit has explained that “[e]ven whei’e the plaintiffs federal rights and the scope of the official’s permissible conduct are clearly established, the qualified immunity defense protects a government actor if

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Sample v. Bailey

    Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 9, 2005

    Clearly Established Right Having established that there was a constitutional violation, we turn to the second step of the qualified immunity analysis — whether the constitutional right at issue was clearly established … qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Riggleman v. Clarke

    District Court, W.D. Virginia · Sep 4, 2024

    Amonette’s actions amounted to deliberate indifference and turn directly to … the clearly established prong of the qualified-immunity analysis.” 55 F.4th at 454. … The Fourth Circuit did not address whether the defendant was entitled to qualified immunity, or specifically the second step of the qualified immunity framework—whether the right at issue was “clearly established” at the

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Stein v. Gunkel

    District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Nov 2, 2021

    Hamblen Cty., Tennessee, 969 F.3d 592, 601 (6th Cir. 2020) (noting that an unresolved question of law cannot qualify as “clearly established law” under the qualified immunity test and assuming the Farmer standard applies … If the law was not clearly established, then neither Gunkel nor Sterling could have violated Stein’s rights and qualified immunity bars Stein’s claims against them.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Joan Gruenke, Individually and as Parent and Natural Guardian of Leah Gruenke, a Minor v. Michael Seip

    225 F.3d 290 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 21, 2000

    When the defendant violates a clearly established right about which a reasonable person would have known, he is not entitled to qualified immunity. See, e.g., Parkhurst v. … to qualified immunity.

    Cited 186 timesPublished
  • Joe Richardson Jr v. Oakland County Animal Shelter

    Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 10, 2020

    “An official has qualified immunity from suits under 42 USC 1983 when the official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … question was clearly established, to analyze first).

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Rodriguez v. Phillips

    66 F.3d 470 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 15, 1995

    Moreover, defendants’ actions at that time must have been objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established federal law; otherwise, those actors are entitled to qualified immunity. … Summary judgment is particularly appropriate when the qualified immunity defense is based on a showing that an asserted right was not clearly established since the inquiry as to whether a right was or was not clearly established

    Cited 96 timesPublished
  • Mark A. Campbell v. Kevin Kallas

    Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 19, 2019

    As relevant here, the judge rejected the claim of qualified immunity, concluding that caselaw clearly established a constitutional right to effective medical treatment. We reverse. … Because no case clearly establishes that denying treatment beyond hormone therapy is unconstitu- tional, qualified immunity applies regardless.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Rohan for Rohan v. Exxon Corp.

    896 F. Supp. 666 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 7, 1995

    Thus, DOHSA clearly supplies the applicable law in this wrongful death case. In Miles v. … The same analysis applies to claims for mental anguish, which are clearly non-pecuniary in nature.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Clay Blanchard v. City of Des Moines

    Court of Appeals of Iowa · Dec 4, 2024

    immunity available to the [City].” … Those questions are to be resolved early because qualified immunity not only serves as protection from liability—it protects government defendants from the risks and distractions of trial as well. See Harlow v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Porter v. Daggett County

    District Court, D. Utah · Feb 24, 2022

    Jerry Jorgensen is entitled to qualified immunity because Plaintiffs have not shown that his actions violated clearly established law. … As discussed above when addressing qualified immunity,189 the Plaintiffs have not identified any clearly established law that demonstrates that Jorgensen must have known that his actions were clearly unlawful when he took

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Lusk v. Arne

    District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · May 2, 2022

    The defendants present no argument as to why they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Farnham, 394 F.3d 496, 485 (7th Cir. 2005) (rejecting qualified immunity defense because it is clearly established that refusing to provide an inmate with his inhaler while he was experiencing breathing problems was a constitutional

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Irish v. Fowler

    979 F.3d 65 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 5, 2020

    was clearly established. … their conduct was 'clearly established at the time.'"

    Cited 90 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.