Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
3.47s
District Court, E.D. California · May 1, 2025
Spencer, 336 F.3d 832, 835 (9th Cir. 2003), did not clearly establish a constitutional 1 right to privacy in juvenile records); A.C. v. Cortez, 398 F. Supp. 3d 748, 752 (S.D. … App’x 811, 812 (9th Cir. 2013) (holding social workers entitled to qualified 4 immunity because there was no clearly established constitutional “right to privacy” for juvenile 5 records even when disclosed to third parties
Cited 0 timesUnknownTomlinson v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit
District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 19, 2021
In doing so, Lindsay and Sorrells asserted qualified immunity as an affirmative defense. See Dkt. No. 17 at 8; Dkt. No. 19 at 7- 8. … See Wicks, 41 F.3d at 994; Backe, 691 F.3d at 648 (“[T]his court has established a careful procedure under which a district court may defer its qualified immunity ruling if further factual development is necessary to
Cited 0 timesUnknown456 N.J. Super. 550 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 2, 2018
Most pertinent to the present appeal, defendants invoked principles of qualified immunity and argued that RDI's constitutional and NJCRA claims must be dismissed because defendants violated no "clearly established" laws … Therefore, "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 11 timesPublishedMarkland v. Carter Co Sheriff Dept Swat Team Members
District Court, E.D. Tennessee · Aug 25, 2025
Clearly Established Right Even if Defendants violated Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights, they are entitled to summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. … To refute Defendants’ qualified immunity defense, Plaintiff bore the burden of demonstrating that the claimed right was clearly established. Ciminillo, 434 F.3d at 466; see also Mosier v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownW. Va. State Police, Corporal R.D. Eshbaugh v. Victoria Hughes, Administratrix
238 W. Va. 406 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jan 26, 2017
involved conduct did not violate clearly established laws of which a reasonable official would have known.”). 7 Maston v. … The record clearly establishes that the November Troopers searched the quarry, and in that search found and recovered some of Mr. Hughes’s remains.
Cited 25 timesPublishedTate Smith v. Odessa Junior College District, et a
507 F. App'x 359 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 10, 2013
As stated, for our analysis of the second prong of the qualified-immunity test, the objective reasonableness of Davis’ actions must be viewed in the light of then clearly-established law. … Needless to say, the law was not clearly established.
Cited 13 timesUnpublishedPatric Patterson v. Kennie Bolden
902 F.3d 845 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 5, 2018
Qualified immunity shields state officials from both civil liability and the burdens of litigation unless their conduct violates a clearly established right of which a reasonable person would have known. Young v. … The district court did not err in granting the defendants qualified immunity. IV.
Cited 865 timesPublished545 F.3d 796 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 24, 2008
He argues that the BIA erred in holding that his burglary conviction could be classified as an attempted theft offense, qualifying him as an aggravated felon under the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”). … The two circuits that have addressed this issue have both concluded, or suggested, that a vehicular burglary can qualify as an attempted theft offense under the INA. See United States v.
Cited 23 timesPublishedCurtis v. Christian County, Kentucky
District Court, W.D. Kentucky · May 24, 2022
However, even if a constitutional violation did occur, the second factor— whether that right was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged misconduct—still entitles Defendants to qualified immunity. … Sheriff’s Off., 695 F.3d 505 (6th Cir. 2012) (explaining the “clearly established” right requirement of qualified immunity particularly in relation to the use of a taser).
Cited 0 timesUnknown403 F. App'x 236 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 12, 2010
Hong has sued in their individual capacities are entitled to qualified immunity. … It is far from clearly established today, much less in 2004 when the university officers voted on Hong’s merits increase, that university professors have a First Amendment right to comment on faculty administrative matters
Cited 4 timesUnpublishedWilliam J. Elliott v. William Thomas, Barbara Propst v. Morton W. Weir
937 F.2d 338 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 4, 1991
Qualified immunity, we know from Mitchell , establishes a right not to be tried. When rules of law clearly establish public officials’ duty, the immunity defense is unavailable. … By sleight of hand you can turn any defense on the merits into a defense of qualified immunity.
Cited 109 timesPublishedDistrict Court, D. Idaho · Dec 20, 2023
violated clearly established law at the time of the incident. … Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability unless a plaintiff proves: “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time
Cited 0 timesUnknown922 F. Supp. 2d 368 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 11, 2013
Young lacked apparent authority to consent to Delgado’s entry, Delgado is shielded from Section 1983 liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity. … City of Hobbs, 90 F.Supp.2d 1313, 1320 (D.N.M.2000) (police had qualified immunity on claim that caretaker had apparent authority to authorize search of common areas of the house). .
Cited 29 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 31, 2021
Under the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity test, the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear such that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right. … Even if Defendants are found to have used excessive force while executing the search warrant, they are still entitled to qualified immunity unless such conduct violated a clearly established right.
Cited 0 timesUnknown444 P.3d 652 · Wyoming Supreme Court · Jul 9, 2019
Thus, we will address the Defendants' argument that they are entitled to qualified immunity. *659 [¶19] "Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability if their conduct does not violate clearly established … To overcome qualified immunity, the alleged right at issue must be "clearly established," such that it is "beyond debate." See, e.g. , Dist. of Columbia v.
Cited 5 timesPublishedDorothy King v. Virginia Betts
354 S.W.3d 691 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Nov 18, 2011
medications violated a clearly established right. … an otherwise clearly established law). .
Cited 29 timesPublishedJuanita CAUSEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
516 F.2d 416 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 24, 1975
Rule 52(a), F.R.Civ.P., lays down the “clearly erroneous” test for appellate review of district court findings of fact. … In sum, the court concluded that appellant had failed to establish unlawful discrimination by the requisite evidentiary preponderance.
Cited 92 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · May 21, 2024
Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting qualified immunity and arguing that Plaintiff cannot establish a genuine dispute of material fact as to his claims (see Dkt. No. 116 at 1, 3, 16–18). … The Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to the warden at summary judgment. Id. at [*13– 14].
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. New York · Jun 3, 2021
“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … Luna, 577 U.S. 7, 12-14 (2015) (reversing denial of qualified immunity because circuit court considered it clearly established that police officer may not “use deadly force against a fleeing felon who d[id] not pose
Cited 0 timesUnknown212 Mich. App. 357 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 1995
"Fees for fees” claims are brought in behalf of the attorney seeking the fees and clearly do not benefit the estate because they do not increase or preserve the estate’s assets. … On the other hand, at least one jurisdiction has permitted such claims, adopting the policy argument that precluding "fees for fees” claims may have a deleterious effect on the ability of an estate to retain qualified and
Cited 22 timesPublished
Ask Donna