Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1917

10,000+ results

2.76s

  • S.G., as Guardian Ad Litem of A.G. A Minor and Individually v. Sayreville Board of Education Georgia B. Baumann William L. Bauer

    333 F.3d 417 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 19, 2003

    In any event, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because there was no clearly established law to the contrary. … speech, procedural due process or equal protection, 3 and because there is no clearly established law to the contrary, we will affirm the District Court’s grant of qualified immunity. 4 IV.

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • C v. Ex Rel. Villegas v. City of Anaheim

    823 F.3d 1252 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 25, 2016

    The panel nevertheless held that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established on January 7, 2012, that using deadly force in this situation, even viewed in the light most favorable … Alternatively, the district court held that Bennallack was entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that his conduct violated the Fourth Amendment.

    Cited 63 timesPublished
  • Matthew Glass v. Allen Kerr

    Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 10, 2023

    (on appeal of denial of summary judgment on issue of qualified immunity, this court has jurisdiction to consider abstract issues of law, such as whether right allegedly infringed was clearly established). … of particular conduct was clearly established).

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Armonia Rigsby v. County of Los Angeles

    531 F. App'x 811 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 24, 2013

    Assuming arguendo that Plaintiffs’ privacy rights were violated, Defendant social workers are entitled to qualified immunity because the rights that Plaintiffs seek to protect were not clearly established at the time of … United States, 373 F.3d 952, 976 (9th Cir. 2004) (concluding that right was not clearly established because the Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court had never squarely addressed the alleged right).

    Cited 5 timesUnpublished
  • Bernard Jones v. Rick McNeese

    746 F.3d 887 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 26, 2014

    was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct. … was 'clearly established.'"

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • Edward Vega v. Floyd H. Miller, James C. Desimone, Howard L. English, Carolyn D. Jones, and G. Peter Cooney

    273 F.3d 460 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 29, 2001

    The Defendants first filed a motion to dismiss on November 10, 1997, arguing, among other things, that they were entitled to qualified immunity on the ground that the law concerning Vega’s claims was not clearly established … Qualified Immunity Government officials are “ ‘shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

    Cited 38 timesPublished
  • Heslip v. Lobbs

    554 F. Supp. 694 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Dec 7, 1982

    Rather than pass on the defendants’ qualified immunity claim, the Supreme Court reshaped the contours of the qualified immunity standard, and remanded the case to the Court of Appeals. 3 In numerous cases, cited supra, courts … In essence, the qualified immunity defense attempts to accommodate these competing social goals. The Harlow opinion suggests that evolving standards for qualified immunity had rendered the defense negligible in effect.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • In Re Conner

    172 B.R. 119 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 15, 1994

    However, this principle cannot change the law which requires an annuity contract to qualify for the section 222.14 exemption. … If all that is required to establish an annuity contract is a stream of payments over time, all installment contracts would qualify as an annuity and that is clearly not what the McCollam decision requires.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Michael McDonald v. Marico Flake

    814 F.3d 804 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 29, 2016

    Officer Flake argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields government officials in the performance of discretionary functions from standing trial for civil liability unless their actions violate clearly established rights. Harlow v.

    Cited 71 timesPublished
  • Clint Small v. James McCrystal

    708 F.3d 997 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 19, 2013

    This court reviews de novo a denial of summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity. Nelson, 583 F.3d at 527. … Qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

    Abrogated on other grounds by Derek Laney v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, 56 F.4th 1153 (2023)Cited 126 timesPublished
  • Blackwell v. St Charles Parish

    275 F. App'x 363 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 24, 2008

    Qualified Immunity The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability “‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established . . . constitutional … Thus, Plaintiffs have failed to establish that Laque’s actions were unreasonable in light of clearly established law and he is entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.

    Cited 18 timesUnpublished
  • Suhail Al Shimari v. CACI International, Incorporated

    Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Sep 21, 2011

    The strategy and tactics employed on the battle- field are clearly not subject to judicial review"). … McKnight, 521 U.S. 399 (1997), the Supreme Court declined to extend qualified immunity to privately employed prison guards in an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Chipperini v. Crandall

    253 F. Supp. 2d 301 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Mar 26, 2003

    Clearly Established Right As noted above, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity if they did not violate Chipperini’s “clearly established” rights when they arrested her. … establish’ the law for qualified immunity purposes.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Epps v. Watson

    492 F.3d 1240 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 18, 2007

    This is particularly true in cases involving qualified immunity, where we must determine whether a defendant's actions violated a clearly established right.”); Fullman v. … “Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” Mitchell v.

    Cited 31 timesPublished
  • Schwartz v. Booker

    702 F.3d 573 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 19, 2012

    II Qualified immunity protects governmental officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Accordingly, whether Booker and Peagler are entitled to qualified immunity depends upon whether the constitutional right was clearly established.

    Cited 128 timesPublished
  • Triomphe Investors v. City of Northwood

    835 F. Supp. 1036 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 29, 1993

    Qualified Immunity Defendants also argue that they are entitled to summary judgment based on the doctrine of qualified immunity. … known that they were violating plaintiffs’ clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Gonzales v. Dankel

    District Court, E.D. Texas · Jun 12, 2024

    Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established rights. Johnston, 14 F.3d at 1059. … “Even if the government official’s conduct violates a clearly established right, the official is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct was objectively reasonable.” Hernandez v. Tex.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Scott v. Superintendent

    Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 2, 2010

    immunity because the right that Scott asserts was 10 violated was not clearly established at the time of the alleged 11 violation. 12 It is now indeed clearly established that such an 13 administrative … 16 that it was "clearly established" in the qualified immunity 17 context, which governs the conduct of government officials who 18 are likely neither lawyers nor legal scholars.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Sims v. City of Seattle

    District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 19, 2023

    Defendants have raised a viable issue regarding the manner in which the Court analyzed 19 qualified immunity. See Cunningham v. … Fry, 873 F.3d 817, 821 (9th Cir. 2017) (“[T]he 4 ‘clearly established’ inquiry is a question of law that only a judge can decide.”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Amnesty International, USA v. Battle

    559 F.3d 1170 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 23, 2009

    ’ qualified immunity from suit. … Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

    Abrogated on other grounds by Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009)Cited 85 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.