Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2000

10,000+ results

1.23s

  • Walter v. Pike County, Pa.

    544 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 timesPublished
  • Kerrin Barrett v. PAE Government Services, Inc.

    975 F.3d 416 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Sep 15, 2020

    of their conduct was clearly established at the time.” … Because the undisputed evidence establishes that the Arlington County defendants had probable cause to detain Plaintiff, qualified immunity bars her § 1983 claim under the first prong of the qualified immunity test, and

    Cited 66 timesPublished
  • 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 timesUnknown
  • (PC) Petillo v. Jasso

    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 timesUnknown
  • Garnett 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 timesPublished
  • Matthews v. Foss

    District 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 timesUnknown
  • Joanne Joyce, Individually and as of the Estate of James D. Joyce v. Town of Tewksbury, Massachusetts, John R. MacKey Alfred Donovan and Robert Budryk

    112 F.3d 19 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Apr 29, 1997

    Because qualified immunity turns primarily on an appraisal of existing case law, oral argument has been deemed unnecessary. … But the en banc court is agreed that qualified immunity applies, and there is less consensus about the underlying constitutional issue.

    Cited 54 timesPublished
  • Hanson v. Blaine County

    District 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 timesUnknown
  • 2

    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 timesPublished
  • Melville v. Southward

    14 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 timesPublished
  • Kompare v. Stein

    801 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 timesPublished
  • DeNigris 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 timesPublished
  • Salahuddin v. Goord

    467 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 timesPublished
  • ZISA v. HAVILAND

    District 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 timesUnknown
  • Amburgey v. Doe

    District 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 timesUnknown
  • Germaine 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 timesPublished
  • Michael v. State

    115 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 timesPublished
  • Blouin 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 timesPublished
  • Varnado

    District 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 timesUnknown
  • Elston v. Collins

    District 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 timesUnknown

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.