Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.22s
Donald Jackson v. Pearl Public School Distr
626 F. App'x 80 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 15, 2015
Although we express no opinion as to whether the school officials’ conduct was constitutionally infirm, we conclude that the school officials are entitled to qualified immunity because it was not “clearly established” in … Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff shows (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was “clearly established” at the
Cited 6 timesUnpublishedSims v. Metropolitan Dade County
972 F.2d 1230 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 18, 1992
The current doctrine covers the state official’s discretionary actions with the cloak of qualified immunity so long as the official’s actions do not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have … ’s actions violated clearly established rights.
Cited 79 timesPublishedNormand v. Mississippi Department of Corrections
District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Aug 3, 2021
has clearly abrogated it.” … constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownBRASHER v. NEW JERSEY STATE PARK POLICE
District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 30, 2025
Plaintiff also contends the Officer Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity because their actions violated his clearly established rights. (Id. at 24–28.) … immunity because no facts demonstrate a violation of clearly established law.
Cited 0 timesUnknownCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 25, 2018
we determine they violated a clearly established right. … Vega, 371 F.3d 110, 8 116 (2d Cir. 2004) (stating that where qualified immunity is based on 9 claimed special need to search parolee’s residence, the issue “is whether, in 10 light of clearly established
Cited 0 timesPublishedThe Cloister East, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 28, 2021
”''® However, “[e]ven where the law is clearly established and the scope of an official’s permissible conduct is clearly defined, the qualified immunity defense also protects an official if it was objectively reasonable … “Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined” at such a high level of generality. /d.
Cited 0 timesUnknownFenn v. City of Truth or Consequences
District Court, D. New Mexico · Nov 6, 2019
immunity prong, and that Defendants Alirez and Apodaca are entitled to qualified immunity under the second “clearly established” prong. … Plaintiff’s failure to carry his burden of showing the law was clearly established entitles Defendants to qualified immunity. See Cox v.
Cited 0 timesUnknown211 F.3d 324 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 3, 2000
It is the defendants’ burden to establish the the title of one of its substitute teachers, it voted to not renew existence of absolute legislative immunity. See Kamplain v. … as established by Bogan v.
Cited 38 timesPublishedKetring v. City of Loveland, Ohio
District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 6, 2023
right was clearly established at the time of the offense. … Once a defendant raises the qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff has the burden of demonstrating a violation of a constitutional right and showing that the right was clearly established.
Cited 0 timesUnknownOccupy Columbia v. Nikki Haley
738 F.3d 107 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 16, 2013
In addressing Appellants’ qualified immunity arguments, the district court first agreed with Appellants “that it was not clearly established at the time … June 12, 2013) (denying qualified immunity for state officials and holding that “plaintiffs had a clearly established right to utilize the Plaza to engage in overnight protest activity”).
Cited 373 timesPublished369 F. Supp. 3d 990 · District Court, C.D. California · Mar 20, 2019
"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 a reasonable person … The qualified immunity analysis involves two distinct steps, determining: (1) whether the facts alleged by a plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) if so, whether the right was "clearly established
Cited 7 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 27, 2023
Finally, on the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, Jones’ right to be free from excessive force was clearly established at the time of the violation, because a robust consensus of persuasive Court of Appeals … doctrine, and its contention that qualified immunity bars the claim is without merit.
Cited 0 timesUnknownHernandez v. County of Santa Clara
District Court, N.D. California · Dec 8, 2020
was clearly established at the time of the 11 alleged misconduct.” … 6 risk that [detainee] would imminently attempt suicide”). 7 Plaintiff argues that qualified immunity does not apply in this case because “custodial 8 safety” is a “clearly established right,”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 8, 2021
App’x 555, 558 (7th Cir. 2001) to argue that limited discovery is appropriate after the defense of qualified immunity is asserted. … See Crawford-El, 523 U.S. at 598 (stating that before allowing discovery, the district court should determine whether, assuming the truth of the plaintiff’s allegations, the official’s conduct violated clearly established
Cited 0 timesUnknownColeman, Sidney v. Sperry, Sam
District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Mar 15, 2024
Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (qualified immunity protects government officials from personal liability provided that “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Finally, once again, defendant Sperry is not entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiff’s malicious prosecution claim, since it was clearly established within this circuit by the time of the events in question, that no
Cited 0 timesUnknown439 F.3d 1055 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 7, 2006
Southwest Airlines, 124 F.3d 1103, 1107 (9th Cir.1997) ("[W]e have jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity where the appeal focuses on whether the defendants violated a clearly established … I would hold that, taking into account the "specific context of th[is] case," the right was not clearly established at the time Officer Shields acted, and Shields is thus entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 271 timesPublishedGwynn H. GILLIAM, Appellant, v. CITY OF OMAHA, a Municipal Corporation, Et Al., Appellees
524 F.2d 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 28, 1975
We affirm for the reason that we fail to find on this record that the district court’s findings, that the claim of racial or sexual discrimination has not been established, are clearly erroneous. … Thus the city of Omaha would clearly be liable for any judgment rendered against it and therefore, the state cannot be considered the real party of interest for purposes of determining Eleventh Amendment immunity.
Cited 45 timesPublishedMachete Productions, L.L.C. v. Heather Page
809 F.3d 281 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 28, 2015
4 To overcome an official’s qualified immunity, a plaintiff must plead facts demonstrating “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of … Accordingly, Machete cannot establish that it had a clearly established right to these funds that Morales violated. See Ashcroft, 131 S. Ct. at 2080.
Cited 54 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. Georgia · Feb 23, 2022
establishing that Ford’s actions were unconstitutional, he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (“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
Cited 0 timesUnknown255 N.J. Super. 350 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 9, 1992
doctrine of parental immunity. … Moreover, we are satisfied that all issues of law raised are clearly without merit. R. 2:ll-3(e)(l)(E).
Cited 4 timesPublished
Ask Donna