Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
3.39s
Abby Martin v. Chancellor for The Board of Regents of The University System Georgia
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 22, 2023
Cannon, 174 F.3d 1271, 1288 n.11 (1999) (“This Circuit has held that dicta cannot clearly establish the law for qualified immunity purposes.”); Hamilton v. … For a broad, clearly established principle to prevent qualified immunity from applying, “the principle must be established with ‘obvious clarity’ by the case law so that ‘every objectively reasonable
Cited 0 timesUnpublished955 F. Supp. 771 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Feb 12, 1997
Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) (qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability under § 1983 unless their conduct violates clearly … ; rather, they are subject to only qualified immunity).
Cited 0 timesPublished93 Daily Journal DAR 9706 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 11, 1993
As clearly held by In Re California Public Utilities Com’n, 892 F.2d 778, 781 (9th Cir.1989), the work product immunity cannot be claimed by one who would ordinarily hold the right to assert the immunity 5 unless that person … Assertion of work product is not assertion of a privilege, but rather assertion of a qualified immunity. Admiral Ins v. U.S.D.C. (Ariz.), 881 F.2d 1486, 1494 (9th Cir.1989).
Cited 41 timesPublished28 F.3d 592 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 27, 1994
The district court granted summary judgment in Turner’s favor, finding that Turner was entitled to qualified immunity, and that the challenged actions did not violate Kikumura’s “clearly established constitutional rights. … As our discussion of Kikumura’s claim for declaratory and injunctive relief (pages 597-99, below) demonstrates, this is a close question, and the point of qualified immunity and its “clearly established” requirement is that
Cited 55 timesPublished45 F.3d 653 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 17, 1995
IV Qualified Immunity and Failure to State a Claim Adago urges that even were he not to be entitled to absolute immunity for some of his conduct, qualified immunity shields him from liability for it. … Under qualified immunity, a government official may claim immunity from suit only when in light of clearly established law and the information the official possesses, it was objectively reasonable for him to think that his
Cited 264 timesPublishedBrown v. Department of the Navy
493 U.S. 831 · Supreme Court of the United States · Oct 2, 1989
Cited 78 timesPublishedNo opinion text69 F. Supp. 2d 177 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 25, 1999
Qualified immunity exists insofar as defendants’ “ ‘conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional law of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Elliott v. … Thus, where the supervisor is not directly involved in the underlying violation, “the ‘clearly established’ prong of the qualified immunity inquiry is satisfied when (1) the subordinate’s actions violated a clearly established
Cited 39 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 13, 2023
Defendants argue that Mojica Carrion’s claims are barred by qualified immunity because the constitutional right which he contends was violated was not clearly established until after the incident underlying his lawsuit … clearly established by Procunier); Martin v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · Jun 10, 2021
Casper, 507 F.3d 1260, 1265 (10th Cir. 2007) (“[I]t is well established that limited discovery may be necessary to resolve qualified immunity claims on summary judgment.”). … of the defendant’s qualified immunity assertion.”
Cited 0 timesUnknown371 F.3d 110 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 10, 2004
entitlement to qualified immunity. … : qualified immunity protects that officer unless' his performance was in violation of clearly established law, or was plainly incompetent.
Cited 43 timesPublishedTrujillo v. Central New Mexico Correctional Facility
District Court, D. New Mexico · Aug 19, 2021
Qualified immunity law Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Turning to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, Plaintiff does not cite any law supporting the claims in the complaint, much less clearly established law.
Cited 0 timesUnknown109 F.3d 1281 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 27, 1997
These defendants will merit qualified immunity unless their alleged conduct violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights,” Harlow v. … Crawford’s clearly established statutory and constitutional rights under the circum *1285 stances. With respect to Ms.
Cited 53 timesPublished531 F.3d 726 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 27, 2008
Qualified Immunity Deputy Starr nonetheless contends that he is protected by qualified immunity. … Moreover, Deputy Starr is not protected by qualified immunity.
Cited 15 timesPublishedDistrict Court, D. North Dakota · Apr 3, 2024
Accordingly, the individually-named Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on Claim One of the Amended Complaint. See Jones v. … McNeese, 675 F.3d 1158, 1161 (8th Cir. 2012) (when deciding qualified immunity, the Court looks to (1) whether a constitutional violation has been adequately pled and (2) whether the right was clearly established at the
Cited 0 timesUnknown933 F.2d 677 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 17, 1991
The cost of establishing the defense of qualified immunity is simply part of the price of having a viable remedy for constitutional violations; it is not a sufficient reason, in and of itself, for finding governmental actors … After all, officials who don’t violate clearly recognized rights will be entitled to qualified immunity — and will not be liable — regardless of how this case is decided.
Cited 17 timesPublished290 F. Supp. 2d 637 · District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 13, 2003
Thus, “unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” … In ruling on a defense of qualified immunity, a court must (1) identify “the specific right allegedly violated”; (2) determine “whether at the time of the alleged violation the right was clearly established”; and (3) if so
Cited 43 timesPublished655 F.3d 78 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Aug 26, 2011
qualified immunity, as it did not -- and could not -- assert such a defense. … Was the Right to Film Clearly Established? Though the "clearly established" inquiry does "not require a case directly on point," al-Kidd, 131 S.
Cited 178 timesPublishedBaker v. Airguide Manufacturing, LLC
151 So. 3d 38 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 29, 2014
Based on the changes to her testimony, Baker argued that there was a genuine dispute over material facts whether Airguide possessed the requisite degree of control over Baker to establish Airguide’s immunity under the … Thus, an employer can establish its right to workers’ compensation immunity by either meeting the three-prong test for common law “borrowed servant” immunity or by establishing that the injured employee came from a “help
Cited 9 timesPublishedLevine v. City of Eureka Springs, Arkansas
District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 29, 2017
Featherstone are each entitled to qualified immunity from Mr. Levine’s claims against them in their individual capacities. See Pearson v. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009) (“Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownBogle v. Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services
District Court, D. Connecticut · Jun 27, 2025
Hyatt should not be shielded by qualified immunity. The Court agrees. As to the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis, Ms. … App'x 533, 535 (2d Cir. 2004) (dismissing qualified immunity appeal because employee's right to be free from racially discriminatory imposition of a probationary period was clearly established in 2004)); DiLegge v.
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna