Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1925

10,000+ results

1.63s

  • Guthrie v. Wetzel

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 12, 2022

    The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that government officials performing “discretionary functions,” are shielded from suit if their conduct did not violate a “clearly established statutory or constitutional right … if so, 2) whether those rights were “clearly established” at the time of the incident.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Daniel Martinez v. Nueces County, TX

    Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 12, 2016

    A public official will be granted qualified immunity unless the plaintiff shows “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged … immunity because the law was not clearly established at the time of the officer’s conduct”). 3 Case: 15-40358 Document: 00513502097 Page: 4 Date Filed

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Estate of Devin Katzfey v. Dittman, Michael

    District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Jan 5, 2022

    Qualified Immunity Finally, defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because it would not have been clear to reasonable officials in their positions that their actions … Once a government official raises the qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must show: (1) he suffered a violation of a statutory or constitutional right; and (2) the law was “clearly established at the time of the alleged

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Waldron v. Roark

    902 N.W.2d 204 · Nebraska Supreme Court · Oct 13, 2017

    Immunity. In a qualified immunity analysis, the dispositive question is whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established. … Hillan, The Not-So-Clearly Established Qualified Immunity Doctrine, The Nebraska Lawyer, March/April 2017, at 15 (discussing history and details of qualified immunity doctrine).  2 Waldron v.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Harris v. Mahr

    Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 4, 2020

    We conclude that the law was not “clearly established” at the time of the incident and reverse the district court’s denial of qualified immunity. … Therefore, the denial of qualified immunity was error.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Bailey v. Beale

    Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 12, 2025

    Instead, it erroneously insists that Officer Beale must show a lack of clearly established law, and that the district court did not need to resolve the clearly-established-law prong of qualified immunity to deny summary … established, Officer Beale is entitled to qualified immunity on the unlawful entry claim.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Urena v. Shaw

    District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 10, 2024

    the right at issue was clearly established when it was allegedly violated.” … - established step of a court’s] qualified immunity analysis.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PC) Shepard v. Borum

    District Court, E.D. California · Jul 13, 2021

    No. 67 23 at 24). 24 Qualified immunity shields government officials from money damages unless their 25 conduct violated “clearly established statutory … Rowland, 65 F.3d 802, 806 & n.4 (9th Cir. 1995) (“The 20 prohibition against retaliatory punishment [for filing prison grievances] is ‘clearly established 21 law’ in the Ninth Circuit, for qualified immunity purposes.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Arnold B. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EDWARD APFFELS COFFEE COMPANY, Bill Berry and J.C. Hill, Defendants-Appellees

    792 F.2d 1482 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 1, 1986

    Williams is clearly within a protected group and has suffered an adverse employ *1488 ment decision. … Williams has also clearly suffered a loss of earnings as a result of not being hired for the permanent position.

    Cited 29 timesPublished
  • Carter v. United States

    684 A.2d 331 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 24, 1996

    to the crucial defense witness involved who is shown to be the only witness who, if believed, would clearly establish a reasonable doubt on the defendant’s guilt. … If immunity of the crucial defense witness is then sought, the defendant must first establish to the trial court’s satisfaction that the proposed testimony is (a) material, (b) clearly exculpatory, (c) non-cumulative, and

    Cited 49 timesPublished
  • Moncrief v. City of Montgomery (CONSENT)

    District Court, M.D. Alabama · Sep 10, 2024

    “Qualified immunity ‘shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”’” Odom v. … Because Plaintiffs failed to carry their burden to establish that Finley violated their constitutional rights, Finley is entitled to qualified immunity on Counts II and IV. C.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • John Betts v. Martha Anne Shearman

    751 F.3d 78 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 2, 2014

    Even  in  the  absence  of  probable  cause,  a  police  officer  is  entitled  to  qualified  immunity  where  “(1)  [her]  conduct  does  not  violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which  … For  the  following reasons, we agree with the district court that the arresting  officers  had  arguable  probable  cause  and  were  entitled  to  qualified  immunity.   10 13

    Cited 341 timesPublished
  • Harris v. American Medical Intern., Inc.

    982 F.2d 528 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 8, 1992

    Plaintiff asserts that much of the evidence necessary to establish her claims was in defendants' possession, and emphasizes that discovery was not yet completed when the district court granted summary judgment. 3 Neither … Nevertheless, the latter allegation must first expressly and clearly be made before any claim under § 1981 is even stated.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Edwards v. DeBord

    District Court, W.D. Virginia · Aug 12, 2019

    immunity. … Harris, 65 F.3d 347, 359 (4th Cir. 1995) (holding that when resolution of qualified immunity question and case itself both depend upon a determination of what actually happened, summary judgment on grounds of qualified

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • BUCEK v. ALLEGHENY COUNTY

    District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 18, 2023

    The individual County Defendants separately raise qualified immunity defenses. … Lapina, 258 F.3d 156, 161 (3d Cir. 2001) (“Qualified immunity will be upheld on a 12(b)(6) motion only when the immunity is established on the face of the complaint.”). II.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Donovan v. Bel-Loc Diner, Inc.

    780 F.2d 1113 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 18, 1985

    The evidence as a whole clearly suffices to establish the existence of a pattern or practice, at least as a “just and reasonable inference.” … While, again, there was some evidence tending to show that some employees may not have been victims of the general pattern that was established prima facie, it clearly did not constitute the sort of evidence of precise work

    Disapproved on other grounds by McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe Co., 486 U.S. 128 (1988)Cited 57 timesPublished
  • TALLEY v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS

    District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 2024

    be entitled to qualified immunity because the Amended Complaint has failed to clearly identify how the clerk violated Plaintiff’s constitutional or statutory rights. See Mirabella v. … right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”); Williams v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Robbie Autery v. Kevin Davis

    355 F. App'x 253 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 12, 2009

    Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity so long as their discretionary actions do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. Lewis v. … Even in the absence of Terry, Sheriff Davis would still be entitled to qualified immunity. In Foy v.

    Cited 2 timesUnpublished
  • Bradley v. DuPage County Sheriff's Office

    District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 29, 2021

    To determine whether qualified immunity applies, the court asks two questions: (1) whether Kuschell violated a constitutional right; and (2) whether that “right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct … any clearly established right.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Gray v. Washington State Department of Transportation

    District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 11, 2023

    Plaintiffs must assert that the Individual 9 Defendants violated a clearly established federal right in order to surmount their qualified 10 immunity defense. See Lindsey v. … Shalmy, 29 F.3d 1382, 1384 (9th Cir. 1994) (noting that the 11 doctrine of qualified immunity does not apply to “clearly established federal rights.”) (emphasis 12 added).

    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.