Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
6.92s
Jarvis v. City of Daytona Beach
District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 23, 2024
A district court’s order denying the defense of qualified immunity is an immediately appealable order within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Mitchell v. … Until the Eleventh Circuit determines whether the relevant law was clearly established, Defendants should not be subjected to trial.
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 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 timesPublishedDistrict 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 timesUnknownJoseph Wheeler, Cross v. City of Pleasant Grove, a Municipal Corp., Cross
664 F.2d 99 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 18, 1981
We see no reason to disturb this finding under the clearly erroneous rule. … The district court held that the defendants in this action were shielded by the defense of a qualified immunity as set forth in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232 , 94 S.Ct. 1683 , 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974).
Cited 67 timesPublishedDistrict 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 timesUnknownDeNigris v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.
861 F. Supp. 2d 185 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 9, 2012
Qualified Immunity Defendants contend that Defendant Frisch is entitled to qualified immunity in her individual capacity. … Accordingly, a grant of qualified immunity is wholly inappropriate at this stage of the proceedings. *197 III.
Cited 30 timesPublished544 F.3d 182 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 18, 2008
violated clearly established law.” … at issue — in the case of qualified immunity, whether that set of facts is “sufficient to establish a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.”
Cited 52 timesPublished467 F.3d 263 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 27, 2006
The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … Summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity is not appropriate because it was clearly established law at the time of the alleged violations that religious exercise may not be denied without any reason.
Abrogated on other grounds by Kravitz v. Purcell, 87 F.4th 111 (2023)Cited 1,436 timesPublishedOnie Pena v. Dallas County Hospital Dist
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 23, 2015
Ct. 1765, 1776 (2015) (“Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.”). … Qualified immunity thus attaches unless the law is clearly established that the defendant’s conduct amounted to a seizure.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedGarnett v. Undercover Officer C0039
Court 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 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 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · Apr 20, 2023
For the same reason, Trebuna is entitled to qualified immunity from suit. See Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526, 105 S. Ct. 2806, 2815, 86 L. … Ed. 2d 411 (1985) (“Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.”).
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 timesPublishedDistrict Court, D. Colorado · Sep 23, 2019
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 timesUnknownBlouin ex rel. Estate of Pouliot v. Spitzer
356 F.3d 348 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Feb 2, 2004
The court did, however, determine that they were entitled to qualified immunity, because “plaintiff has failed to allege a violation of a clearly established right. … Qualified Immunity We now consider qualified immunity, which shields a government official acting in an official capacity from suit for damages under § 1983 unless the official “violated clearly established rights of which
Cited 45 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 timesUnknownRobison v. Department of Insurance, Finanical Institutions and Professional Registration
District Court, E.D. Missouri · Mar 1, 2022
In a claim brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, qualified immunity protects a government official from liability unless his conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person … [174], Plaintiff has not shown he has a “clearly established” constitutional or statutory right to be on the List.9 Pearson, 555 U.S. at 231 (explaining qualified immunity protects a government official from
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · Nov 15, 2019
Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would know … right was clearly established at the time of the violation.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownEstate 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 timesUnknown
Ask Donna