Case law

Gallardo v. DiCarlo

203 F. Supp. 2d 1160 · District Court, C.D. California · May 13, 2002

Qualified Immunity DiCarlo asserts that she is entitled to dismissal of the FAC on the grounds of qualified immunity. 11 In Section 1983 claims, the doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damage … She is not entitled to qualified immunity based on the allegations in the FAC. D.

Kaur v. Dual Arch International

California Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 2024

Therefore, for the reasons articulated by Kachlon, we conclude that the immunity provided by section 2924, subdivision (d) is the qualified common interest immunity of section 47, subdivision (c). … The malice required to defeat section 47 qualified immunity is “ ‘actual malice.’ ” (Taus, at p. 721.; King v. U.S.

Avratin v. Bermudez

420 F. Supp. 2d 1121 · District Court, S.D. California · Jan 5, 2006

Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Clearly Established Right Having satisfied the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis, the Court must consider whether “it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he confronted

Klock v. Cain

813 F. Supp. 1430 · District Court, C.D. California · Feb 17, 1993

At the trial, the court dismissed this claim based on application of the qualified immunity defense. 2 The court ruled that *1431 this constitutional right (assuming its existence) was not “clearly established” at the time … At that point, the court held that, as a matter of law, the qualified immunity defense precluded plaintiff from recovery on his local "deportation” claim. 3 .

Ambrose v. Coffey

696 F. Supp. 2d 1109 · District Court, E.D. California · Dec 24, 2009

Whether Weydert and Coffey are Entitled to Qualified Immunity. 6 1. Grounds for Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because it is not clearly established that MUAs are legal. … Weydert and Coffey are “entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show” their actions *1115 violated the Constitution. Pearson v.

Murchison v. County of Tehama

California Court of Appeal · Sep 30, 2021

violated clearly established law. … Payday California, Inc. (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 1419, 1433, fn. 6), and “we may consider such decisions when determining whether a constitutional right was clearly established for purposes of our qualified immunity analysis

Trujillo v. City of Ontario

428 F. Supp. 2d 1094 · District Court, C.D. California · Apr 14, 2006

Qualified Immunity “[government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … If an officer’s actions are objectively reasonable under the circumstances and in light of the clearly established law, then qualified immunity should be found. Anderson, 483 U.S. at 641 , 107 S.Ct. 3034 .

Toler v. Paulson

551 F. Supp. 2d 1039 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 14, 2008

Qualified Immunity Defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … In analyzing claims involving qualified immunity, courts engage in a two-part test.

Figueroa v. Kern County

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 4, 2021

Id. 21 “Prosecutors are protected by qualified, rather than absolute, immunity when they perform 22 activities outside their core role as courtroom advocates.” Id.; see also Kalina v. … Fletcher, 522 23 U.S. 118, 130-31 (1997) (qualified immunity attached for attesting to facts in support of a search 24 warrant). 25 In his opposition

(PS) Petersen v. Sims

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 17, 2021

if it was clearly 5 established.” … immunity or 7 the specific question of whether Defendant’s conduct violated a right clearly established at the 8 time.

Tungwarara v. United States

400 F. Supp. 2d 1213 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 13, 2005

The defense 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 … On the uncontested facts of the search here, however, Ludwigs is entitled to qualified immunity. C. Plaintiffs Fifth Amendment Right To Equal Protection Was Not Clearly Established In 2002.

Luna v. Ridge

436 F. Supp. 2d 1163 · District Court, S.D. California · Jun 9, 2006

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields public officials from liability for civil damages as long as their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … “Thus, a two-part test controls our qualified immunity analysis. First, we must determine whether the law that governs the official’s conduct was clearly established.

Olvera v. County of Sacramento

932 F. Supp. 2d 1123 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 19, 2013

If the court concludes a right is not clearly established, the official is entitled to qualified immunity. Id. at 202, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . … If a right is clearly established, an official is not entitled to qualified immunity unless a • reasonable official would not have known that his conduct violated the clearly established right.

Robinson v. Cnty. of Shasta

384 F. Supp. 3d 1137 · District Court, E.D. California · May 1, 2019

Turning to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, the court notes that clearly established law must be defined with a "high 'degree of specificity.' " District of Columbia v. Wesby , --- U.S. ----, 138 S. … Ultimately, because no controlling authority had yet clearly established as unconstitutional the use of a taser in dart mode, as used by the officer, the officer was entitled to qualified immunity. Id. at 833.

Cordell v. Tilton

515 F. Supp. 2d 1114 · District Court, S.D. California · Sep 17, 2007

In ruling on qualified immunity, the court must decide the “ ‘purely legal’ issue of ‘whether facts alleged by the plaintiff support a claim of violation of clearly established law.’ ” Lytle v. … “Whether the right at issue in a claim of qualified immunity is clearly established is judged as of the date of the incident alleged and is a pure question of law....” Phillips v.

Ramirez v. County of Los Angeles

397 F. Supp. 2d 1208 · District Court, C.D. California · Oct 25, 2005

Bravo now moves for summary judgment asserting qualified immunity, the doctrine that immunizes law enforcement officers from civil suits where their conduct did not violate a constitutional right that was clearly established … The Constitutional rights in dispute have been clearly established.

C.N. v. Wolf

410 F. Supp. 2d 894 · District Court, C.D. California · Nov 28, 2005

However, the doctrine of qualified immunity protects “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … Hence the Complaint alleges discriminatory treatment regarding a clearly established constitutional right, and Wolf is not entitled to qualified immunity. B.

(PC) Hardney v. Warren

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 5, 2022

Qualified Immunity 2 Alternatively, Kumeh lays claim to qualified immunity. … See Moonin, 868 F.3d 13 at 873-74 (denying qualified immunity because controlling Ninth Circuit authority established the 14 applicable general rules and cases from three other circuit courts and several district courts

Cerniglia v. County of Sacramento

566 F. Supp. 2d 1034 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 17, 2008

The issue of qualified immunity was not before the Ninth Circuit in Jones , consequently it did not address the issue. Qualified immunity was, however, before the Court in Hy-drick. … In analyzing qualified immunity with respect to the substantive due process claim and holding that it was clearly established that the substantive due process protections of the Fourteenth Amendment apply to SVPs, 500 F.3d

Carter v. City of Carlsbad

799 F. Supp. 2d 1147 · District Court, S.D. California · Jun 30, 2011

Whether Officer Meritt Is Entitled to Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … The decisions go back and forth, however, on the second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry — whether the law was clearly established at the time of the incident.