Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.75s
Patricia Finnegan v. Richard Fountain
915 F.2d 817 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 1, 1990
By comparison, to establish the qualified immunity defense, a police officer must satisfy one of two tests: either that his conduct did not violate “clearly established rights” of which a reasonable person would have known … We read Finnegan’s argument to state that any use of constitutionally excessive force violates “clearly established” rights, so that the qualified immunity may not shield one who has used excessive force.
Abrogated on other grounds by Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001)Cited 123 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 6, 2020
Adherence to the Fifth Circuit’s qualified immunity analysis in Pratt, as well as the Supreme Court’s frequent exhortation “not to define clearly established law at a high level of generality,” means that Gutierrez does … Because there is no clearly established law holding unconstitutional restraints analogous to the Defendants’ restraint of Timpa, the Court holds that qualified immunity bars the excessive force claims against the Defendants
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. New York · Feb 20, 2020
“An official is therefore entitled to immunity if his action was ‘objectively legally reasonable in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.’” … Defendants advance two arguments in support of their position that they are entitled to qualified immunity: (1) they did not violate a clearly established right, and (2) they had arguable probable
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PC) Bowell v. California Department of Corrections
District Court, E.D. California · Jul 30, 2020
Legal Standards 3 Qualified immunity applies when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established 4 statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … City of Roseville, 882 F.3d 843, 856-57 16 (9th Cir. 2018) (noting that Ninth Circuit precedent is sufficient to meet the “clearly established” 17 prong of qualified immunity); Hamby v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownJasmaine f/k/a Duane L. Fox v. Linsenby
District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 13, 2021
“To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, the court must examine (1) whether the plaintiff has demonstrated that the officer violated a constitutional right and (2) whether that right was clearly … Dolgos, 884 F.3d 172, 178 (4th Cir. 2018) (internal quotation marks omitted); see Lovelace, 472 F.3d at 199 (finding that an inmate’s RLUIPA rights were clearly established in 2002 for qualified immunity purposes).
Cited 0 timesUnknownLeverington v. City of Colorado Springs
643 F.3d 719 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 5, 2011
be resolved as a matter of law, the law is not clearly established and qualified immunity is appropriate.” … Leverington’s free-speech rights in this context were not clearly established, and Peters is entitled to qualified immunity on this basis. In addition, it was not clearly established that Ms.
Cited 167 timesPublished461 F. App'x 568 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 12, 2011
The use of physical restraints, moreover, also would have violated the decedent’s clearly established right to be free from excessive force at the time of the incident. … Defendants, therefore, were not entitled to qualified immunity. AFFIRMED. 3
Cited 2 timesUnpublishedDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · Dec 17, 2024
In general, the doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from section 1983 liability “unless their conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person … United States, 813 F.3d 689, 696 (8th Cir. 2015) (“Whether an asserted federal right was clearly established at a particular time, so that a public official who allegedly violated the right has no qualified immunity from
Cited 0 timesUnknownSydney Rieman v. Gloria Vazquez
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 2, 2024
The panel held that defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity from suit for failing to provide notice of the hearing. Ms. Rieman had a due process right to such notice and that right was clearly established. … immunity because they did not violate any clearly established constitutional rights.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. California · Mar 11, 2024
They also argue that Gatmen and Herron are entitled to qualified immunity 16 because they carried Bell at the direction of Lieutenant Krol. … Cnty. of Orange, 364 F.3d 1107, 1112 (9th Cir. 2004) (clearly established right to be free 7 || of excessive force encompasses “well-established” right to be free of overly tight handcuffs) (citing 8 Meredith
Cited 0 timesUnknown360 Pa. Super. 539 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 11, 1987
With respect to Judge Hill, the law in Pennsylvania is well established that judges are absolutely immune from liability for damages when performing judicial acts, even if their actions are in error or performed with malice … Clearly such activity would have fallen within the parameters of Mr. Bala’s duties. As such, Mr. Bala is immune from suit in the instant matter under the protection of quasi-judicial immunity.
Cited 55 timesPublished526 F. App'x 509 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 13, 2013
Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for discretionary functions performed in the course of duty so long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Stille those rights were clearly established at the time of the incident, Stille is not entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity.
Cited 13 timesUnpublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 3, 2025
In addition, Officer Brunner is entitled to qualified immunity, because he relied upon a credible report that a crime had occurred, and upon his interview with the Plaintiff, which supported his belief that a crime had … Barkes, 575 U.S. 822, 825 (2015) (“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time
Cited 0 timesUnknownPastore v. Catron County Sheriff's Office
District Court, D. New Mexico · Nov 17, 2021
Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity protects officials from civil liability as long as they do not “‘violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Regarding the clearly established law prong of a qualified immunity test, courts must not define the relevant constitutional right “at a high level of generality.” White v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 27, 2025
Defendant Henry puts forth that qualified immunity shields him from liability as Plaintiff has not pled facts demonstrating he violated a clearly established constitutional right. (D.E. 63-2 at 15.) … clearly established in light of the specific context of the case.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownWilliam J. Harrell, Patricia Parker, and Karen Schamm v. United States of America, Ltjg Atkin
875 F.2d 828 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 14, 1989
Qualified Immunity A government official performing a discretionary function is entitled to qualified immunity from personal liability when the acts complained of violate no clearly established law of which a reasonable person … Moreover, appellant argues that his actions were within the limits of clearly established law, thus entitling him to immunity with respect to the constitutional torts. 2 Lt.
Cited 13 timesPublishedBessie Jones v. City of Cincinnati
736 F.3d 688 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 29, 2012
The district court denied qualified and statutory immunity on four claims. … For the foregoing reasons, we REVERSE the district court’s denial of qualified immunity and Ohio statutory immunity.
Cited 16 timesPublishedJustin Parsons v. City of Pontiac
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 24, 2008
“If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.” Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201. … But under § 1983, “an arresting agent is entitled to qualified immunity if he or she could reasonably (even if erroneously) have believed that the arrest was lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information
Cited 0 timesPublished939 F.2d 699 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 10, 1991
The guards assert that they are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity because it was not clearly established in March 1985 that the guards’ conduct would violate Felix’s clearly established constitutional rights. … Qualified Immunity The guards argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate any clearly established constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known.
Cited 58 timesPublishedMichigan Supreme Court · Jul 31, 2023
immunity rather than complete immunity applies where the prosecutor is acting as a police officer and not in the role of an advocate) (quotation marks and citation omitted). … The lead opinion does not address this important qualifier.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna