Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.97s
986 F.3d 11 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jan 19, 2021
Cronin, 537 F.3d 26, 34 (1st Cir. 2008) (reasoning that, even if a constitutional right has been clearly established, a defendant may nonetheless be protected by qualified immunity if a reasonable official … So now, as we leapfrog the initial elements of the qualified-immunity analysis (recall that we're assuming arguendo that the use of the pepper spray was unreasonable and Justiniano had a clearly established right to be
Cited 58 timesPublished109 N.J. 173 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 25, 1988
Thus, the qualified-immunity defense would be lost if the official knew or reasonably should have known that his or her action would violate plaintiffs clearly established constitutional rights or if he or she maliciously … For Kirk to defeat Cardillo’s assertion of the defense of qualified immunity, Kirk must show that the law was clearly established at the time of the incident.
Cited 55 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. Mississippi · Oct 28, 2020
Ct. 1148, 1153 (2018) (reversing denial of qualified immunity)), amended in part, No. 3:18-CV-609-DPJ-LRA, 2019 WL 3806641 (S.D. Miss. Aug. 13, 2019), aff’d, 974 F.3d 594 (5th Cir. 2020). … Ct. at 1153 (reversing denial of qualified immunity where facts did not fit clearly established law). The 2020 autopsy report and expert report do not “clearly” change that result either.
Cited 0 timesUnknownW. Va. Board of Education and L. Wade Linger, Jr. v. Jorea M. Marple
236 W. Va. 654 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 10, 2015
Marple has not identified a clearly established right that was violated by the discretionary actions of the Board or Mr. Linger, her suit is precluded by qualified immunity. A. … the constitutional standards clearly established at the time[?]”
Cited 43 timesPublished350 Ark. 114 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 26, 2002
Qualified Immunity A motion for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity is precluded only when the plaintiff has asserted a constitutional violation, demonstrated the constitutional right is clearly established and … Thus, an official is immune from suit if his actions did not violate clearly established principles of law of which a reasonable person would have knowledge. Virden v.
Cited 22 timesPublishedJohn Ronald Bertram v. George Deukmejian
9 F.3d 1550 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 4, 1993
for qualified immunity purposes. … Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 193-94 (1984) (state official retains qualified immunity if the federal constitutional right was not clearly established, even if the conduct clearly violated state statute or regulation). 5 In Turner
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 24, 2020
Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages if their actions did not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ … immunity”); Clash, 77 F.3d at 1048 (denying summary judgment on qualified immunity claim because the Court lacked the “given facts” that either do or do not show a violation of “clearly established law”); Pabon v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownPeople of Michigan v. Robert Tuttle
498 Mich. 192 · Michigan Supreme Court · Jul 27, 2015
not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. … required to establish immunity.
Cited 105 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 2, 2020
Defendants further contend that Deputy Mendoza is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate Burn’s clearly-established rights. … Therefore, Mendoza is entitled to summary judgment based upon the clearly-established prong of the qualified immunity analysis.
Cited 0 timesUnknown304 F.3d 704 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 12, 2002
However, under the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, Sonnleitner has failed to establish that this right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … The individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because Sonn-leitner has failed to carry his burden of establishing the existence of a clearly established constitutional right to a pre-de-motion hearing as to
Cited 81 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 14, 2026
When it comes to qualified immunity, “[a] prison official is immune from suit if the constitutional right at issue was not clearly established at the time of the violation, and thus a reasonable officer would not have known … The right to be protected from inmate-on-inmate violence was clearly established at the time of the complained-of events and has been clearly established for decades. See, e.g., Mayoral v.
Cited 0 timesUnknown172 Wash. App. 616 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 7, 2013
Accordingly, because the particularized right at issue was not “clearly established,” the trial court correctly ruled that the police officer was entitled to qualified immunity against this claim. … In evaluating a claim of qualified immunity, we must bear in mind that *629 courts “undermine the values qualified immunity seeks to promote . .. when what is not clearly established is held to be so.” al-Kidd, 131 S.
Cited 10 timesPublished492 F.3d 766 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 29, 2007
A judicial pronouncement that an ordinance is consistent with common sense hardly establishes that it is so. B. … The district court, in its order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants, determined that Chief Fruchey was entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 42 timesPublishedVictoria Cunningham v. Dep't of Children's Servs.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 13, 2021
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 rights of which a reasonable person … To defeat the qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff is required to plead facts demonstrating a violation of a constitutional right that is clearly established in a “particularized sense.” Johnson v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedDistrict Court, D. Colorado · Sep 13, 2021
Oba is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate clearly established law.4 See Medina v. … to show law was clearly established); cf.
Cited 0 timesUnknown711 F.3d 120 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 4, 2013
To accomplish this goal, the ADA requires that 13 employers provide reasonable accommodations to qualified 14 individuals. See id. § 12112(b)(5). … This burden is not heavy: “It is enough for the plaintiff 21 to suggest the existence of a plausible accommodation, the costs of 22 which, facially, do not clearly exceed its benefits.”
Cited 334 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · Jan 27, 2023
Therefore, Fisher failed to establish a constitutional violation, and Dr. Smith is entitled to qualified immunity. … See Escobar, 895 F.3d at 393; Romero, 888 F.3d at 176 (holding that to avoid qualified immunity, plaintiff must show violation of constitutional right and right was clearly established at time of
Cited 0 timesUnknownCassidy Jared Loch v. City of Litchfield
689 F.3d 961 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 27, 2012
Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability and the burdens of litigation unless his conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … An official is entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, establishes a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) the right was clearly established
Cited 104 timesPublishedStarkey Ex Rel. AB v. BOULDER COUNTY SOC. SERV.
569 F.3d 1244 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 29, 2009
Even if they had violated one of the Starkeys’ constitutional rights (in which case BCDSS might be liable), they would be protected by qualified immunity if the constitutional right had not been clearly established at the … Qualified immunity, however, is available only in suits against officials sued in their personal capacities, not in suits against governmental entities or officials sued in their official capacities. See Beedle v.
Cited 78 timesPublishedPensacola Christian College v. Bruhn
80 So. 3d 1046 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 30, 2011
Toyota Distribs., LLC., 60 So.3d 1155, 1157-58 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (“A special employer qualifies as such where ‘(1) there was a contract for hire, either express or implied, between the special employer and the employee; … Hecht Invs., Ltd., 924 So.2d 944, 945-46 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (holding that W-2 tax forms alone did not establish an employment relationship). Rather, as this court stated in Hoar Construction v.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna