Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.55s
District Court, E.D. California · Jan 24, 2023
If the law 18 did not put the officer on notice that his conduct would be clearly unlawful, summary judgment 19 based on qualified immunity is appropriate. … Willden, 26 678 F.3d 991, 1000 (9th Cir. 2012) (qualified immunity analysis requiring (1) determining the 27 contours of the clearly established right at the time of the challenged conduct and (2) examining 1
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. California · Aug 6, 2024
Saucier, 25 533 U.S. at 202. 26 A court considering a claim of qualified immunity must determine whether the 1 was clearly established such that it would … , 533 U.S. at 194); Henry A., 678 F.3d at 1000 (qualified immunity analysis 6 requiring (1) determining the contours of the clearly established right at the time of the 7 challenged conduct and (2) examining whether
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, D. Idaho · Sep 19, 2019
Defendants stress that Escondido reiterated that for purposes of qualified immunity, “the clearly established right must be defined with specificity” and “repeat[ed] its holding from Kisela [v. … Defendants believe that the Court “needed to identify cases with particularized facts to show that the Defendants’ acts were clearly unlawful” to deny them qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage.
Cited 0 timesUnknownCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 30, 2016
Qualified immunity is unavailable where, 22 as here, the action violates an accused’s clearly established constitutional 23 rights, and no reasonably competent police officer could believe otherwise. … In Ricciuti, the panel held that fabrication of evidence 13 violated a “clearly established constitutional right[]” and thus the officers were 14 not entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesPublished14 F.3d 993 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 27, 1994
The only issue before this Court is whether Doory is entitled to qualified immunity. 6 I Qualified immunity shields a governmental official from liability for civil monetary damages if the officer’s “conduct does not violate … Thus, appellant Doory is entitled to qualified immunity. Accordingly, the order of the district court regarding the availability of qualified immunity to Doory as to the Fifth Amendment claims is REVERSED. .
Cited 82 timesPublished14 Brief Times Rptr. 608 · Supreme Court of Colorado · May 14, 1990
Hogan, 292 Or. 154 , 637 P.2d 114 (1981) (orthopedic surgeons were properly qualified to testify on standard of care for podiatric surgery where foundation evidence established that orthopedic and podiatric procedure, practice … Clearly, when a proper foundation establishes that the expert witness, by reasons of knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, is so substantially familiar with the standard of care applicable to the defendant
Cited 51 timesPublished801 F.2d 883 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 4, 1986
violate clearly established rights. … Any doubt as to whether the prosecution was without probable cause must be *892 resolved in favor of the defendant because she has qualified immunity unless she violated a clearly established right.
Cited 70 timesPublished895 F. Supp. 375 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 25, 1995
Qualified Immunity In any event, Koelsch asserts the defense of qualified immunity. … The qualified immunity inquiry in this context is a familiar one: Qualified immunity shields government official performing discretionary functions from civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established
Cited 31 timesPublishedDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 31, 2020
Haviland does not address whether his alleged constitutional harm violated a clearly established right. “[T]he burden of pleading a qualified immunity defense rests with the defendant.” Thomas v. … App’x 373, 378-79 (3d Cir. 2004) (“To the extent the Supervisory Defendants fail to address the issue [of whether a right was clearly established], therefore, their claim for qualified immunity fails ipso facto.”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownGermaine Smart v. COII Ronald England
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 16, 2024
He found that qualified immunity barred Smart’s complaint because no clearly established law pro- hibited the officials from disciplining Smart. … Defendants cannot benefit from the shield of qualified immunity by arguing the law was not clearly established.
Cited 0 timesPublished115 P.3d 517 · Alaska Supreme Court · Jun 9, 2005
Applying the clearly erroneous standard of review, the court of appeals affirmed the superior court’s rejection of Michael’s proposed mitigating factors. … ’s rejection of Michael’s proposed mitigating factors under a clearly erroneous standard.
Questioned by Pocock v. State, 2012 Alas. App. LEXIS 31 (2012)Cited 28 timesPublished22 F.3d 968 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 19, 1994
Amalgamated failed to establish that its computation, in fact, was consistent with the requirement of the regulations. … Pensions § 13 (1987); see also ERISA § 3(35), 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (35), and if "qualified” under 26 U.S.C. § 401 et seq., is subject to favorable Internal Revenue Service treatment. .
Cited 43 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. Louisiana · Nov 25, 2025
Qualified Immunity Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff demonstrates that (1) the defendant violated an actual constitutional or federal statutory right that is clearly established … The qualified immunity defense has two prongs: whether an official's conduct violated a constitutional right of the plaintiff; and whether the right was clearly established at the time of the violation.
Cited 0 timesUnknownSciotto Ex Rel. Sciotto v. Marple Newtown School District
81 F. Supp. 2d 559 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 23, 1999
Qualified Immunity Defendants James Smith and Stu Nathans claim that they are entitled to qualified immunity from plaintiffs’ suit. The defendants have met their burden of pleading a qualified immunity defense, Gomez v. … a right for qualified immunity purposes.
Cited 21 timesPublishedEstate of Sylville K Smith v. City of Milwaukee Wisconsin
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Oct 18, 2019
Whether the right was “clearly established” at the time of its alleged violation In establishing the second prong in the qualified immunity analysis, a plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the constitutional … right was “clearly established.”
Cited 0 timesUnknown631 F. App'x 487 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 27, 2016
ruling on qualified immunity, George v. Edholm, 752 F.3d 1206, 1214 (9th Cir. 2014), and we affirm. … Ct. 2074, 2080, 2083 (2011) (setting forth qualified immunity test and recognizing that a clearly established right does “not require a case directly on point”).
Cited 0 timesUnpublished349 F.3d 731 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Nov 17, 2003
As discussed below, accepting the facts as the district court2 viewed them in denying qualified immunity, the police officers vio- lated clearly established federal law. … the official’s conduct did not violate clearly established law."
Cited 146 timesPublishedDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · Mar 7, 2023
Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … violation was clearly established.
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States v. Rosales-Bruno
676 F.3d 1017 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 6, 2012
From there, Rosales-Bruno argues that the government failed to establish that he did, in fact, employ “physical force” when he committed the offense of false imprisonment. … We find, however, that Rosales-Bruno clearly objected to specific parts of Paragraph 30 of the PSR, disputing the factual accuracy of that paragraph’s description of the conduct underlying his false imprisonment conviction
Cited 47 timesPublishedEstate of De'Angelo Brown v. West
District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 30, 2022
Andrews, 972 F.3d 1007 (8th Cir. 2020) (examining when a right is clearly established for qualified immunity analysis). Moore, 514 F.3d at 760. … Andrews, 972 F.3d 1007 (8th Cir. 2020) (examining when a right is clearly established for qualified immunity analysis).
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna