Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
6.32s
631 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 timesUnpublished592 U.S. 43 · Supreme Court of the United States · Dec 10, 2020
By the time Congress enacted RFRA, this Court had interpreted the modern ver- sion of §1983 to permit monetary recovery against officials who violated “clearly established” federal law. E.g., Procu- nier v. … who flout clearly established law,” Tr. of Oral Arg. 42; see District of Co- lumbia v.
Cited 203 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · Jul 17, 2025
Hanna, 726 F.3d 631, 638 (5th Cir. 2013) (qualified immunity requires alleging a violation of a clearly established constitutional right at the time of the conduct). … Because the complaint plausibly alleges facts supporting a violation of clearly established right under the Fourteenth Amendment, Roy is not entitled to qualified immunity at this stage.
Cited 0 timesUnknown465 F. Supp. 2d 439 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 29, 2006
The “clearly established Federal law” which governs ineffective- assistance of counsel claims is the two-pronged standard set forth in Strickland v. … Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 363 , 120 S.Ct. 1495 , 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000) (stating that the “Strickland test qualifies as ‘clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court’ ”).
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 4, 2025
Qualified immunity shields government officials from § 1983 liability unless their conduct violates a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct. Mace v. … To overcome qualified immunity on his excessive force claim, Christian must show that Officer Martinez violated a constitutional right and that the right was clearly established. Guerra v.
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 timesUnknownCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 27, 2025
immunity because releasing the Investigative Report did not violate clearly established law. … A qualified immunity analysis considers whether: “(1) . . . the official violated a statutory right or constitutional right, and (2) . . . the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”
Cited 0 timesUnpublished436 F.3d 997 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 30, 2006
(internal marks omitted). 16 Qualified immunity protects public officials from personal liability under § 1983 when "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … The court held that the legislators, who were not the decisionmakers, were entitled to qualified immunity because there was no clearly established federal right for an individual "to prevent legislators from exercising their
Cited 30 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. New York · Feb 11, 2025
Qualified Immunity Government actors may invoke qualified immunity to shield themselves from liability for civil damages “‘when [their] conduct does not violate clearly … Qualified Immunity Police Defendants then assert qualified immunity for Plaintiff’s excessive force claim because they contend that there is no “clearly established law
Cited 0 timesUnknown734 F. Supp. 2d 1237 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Aug 24, 2010
Clearly Established Having found sufficient evidence of excessive force on the part of Officer Schulmerich, the court addresses the second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry concerning whether the constitutional right … was clearly established at the time of the tasing.
Cited 17 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 20, 2025
Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from personal liability for civil damages under section 1983 … clearly established right”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownNathaniel Brent v. Wayne Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs.
555 F. App'x 519 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 6, 2014
Alternatively, they contend that the rights that the district court identified were not clearly established and, therefore, qualified immunity shields them. … But on a claim of qualified immunity, “[t]he plaintiff has the burden of establishing that the law was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” Andrews v.
Cited 3 timesUnpublished355 F.3d 1028 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 21, 2004
Similarly, Manning is able to meet the second prong of the qualified immunity test: his constitutional due process right was “clearly established” at the time he asserts it was violated. … established at that time, Agents Buchan and Miller cannot prevail on their qualified immunity claim.
Cited 32 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 20, 2022
Qualified Immunity Although qualified immunity is expansive, a government official “who performs an act clearly established to be beyond the scope of his discretionary authority … However, “in considering whether constitutional rights were clearly established for qualified-immunity purposes, we view the issue from ‘the layman’s perspective.’” Bland v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 2025
Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary acts from civil liability so long as their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Therefore, the Court need not assess the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis. See Ely.
Cited 0 timesUnknown568 Pa. 481 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 2002
This interpretation is contrary to the well-established cannon of construction that courts should generally apply qualifying words or phrases to the words immediately preceding them. 1 Pa.C.S. § 1903; Midboe v. … Qualifying words “do not extend to or include other words, phrases, or clauses more remote, unless such extension or inclusion is clearly required by the intent or meaning of the context or disclosed by an examination of
Cited 46 timesPublishedMarina P. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security
214 Ariz. 326 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Feb 20, 2007
To the extent findings are not adequately supported by the record, they are clearly erroneous. Grant v. Ariz. Pub. Serv. Co., 133 Ariz. 434, 456 , 652 P.2d 507, 529 (1982). B. … prevented Mother from parenting the children that Mother has substantially neglected or willfully refused to remedy. ¶30 Missing one visit and being late for two others fourteen months prior to the severance trial hardly qualifies
Cited 94 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 1, 2021
No. 284—is needed to establish that Blankenship is not entitled to qualified immunity. … Jan. 18, 2021) (Under the clearly-established prong, “‘the dispositive question is whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.’
Cited 0 timesUnknownRoxana Santos v. Frederick County Board of Commissioners
725 F.3d 451 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 7, 2013
established’ for purposes of qualified immunity”); see also Hope v. … established for qualified immunity purposes.”
Cited 113 timesPublished
Ask Donna