Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1772

10,000+ results

4.11s

  • BRYHEIM JAMAR BASKIN VS. RAFAEL MARTINEZ (L-0901-14, CAMDEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

    New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 14, 2018

    "The doctrine of qualified immunity operates to shield 'government officials performing discretionary functions generally . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Ct. 1765, 1776 (2015) ("Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if 'clearly established' law can simply be defined as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.").

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Sallenger, Mary v. Oakes, Brian

    Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 10, 2007

    If the right was clearly estab- lished, the government actor is not entitled to qualified immunity. … If the right was not clearly established, the officers are still entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Kennedy v. Dexter Consolidated Schools

    129 N.M. 436 · New Mexico Supreme Court · Aug 14, 2000

    immunity for the strip-to-undergarments search of Randy Ford because while that search violated his rights, those rights were not “clearly established” in 1992; (2) two Defendants deserved qualified immunity because their … QUALIFIED IMMUNITY {10} All Defendants assert that qualified immunity insulates them from liability.

    Cited 61 timesPublished
  • Robert Harper v. County of Delaware

    Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 12, 2019

    And for qualified immunity purposes, 3 The individual defendants argued below that they were entitled to qualified immunity. … The Municipal Defendants Our conclusion that the right Harper claims was not clearly established does not resolve his claims against the municipal defendants, which cannot assert a qualified immunity defense to

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Clark v. Cole <b> <font color="RED"> Do Not File in this Case - Case Consolidated, file in Case No. 18-CV-03241-SRB . </b> </font>

    District Court, W.D. Missouri · Nov 30, 2018

    that right was clearly established at the time of the employee’s firing.” … Regarding step two of the qualified immunity analysis, “[f]or a constitutional right to be clearly established, its contours ‘must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Denton v. Cole <b> <font color="RED"> Do Not File in this Case - Case Consolidated, file in Case No. 18-CV-03241-SRB . </b> </font>

    District Court, W.D. Missouri · Nov 30, 2018

    that right was clearly established at the time of the employee’s firing.” … Regarding step two of the qualified immunity analysis, “[f]or a constitutional right to be clearly established, its contours ‘must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Willie Dean, Jr. v. Johnnie Jones

    984 F.3d 295 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 4, 2021

    And even if there had been an Eighth Amendment violation, according to the officers, they were entitled to qualified immunity because that violation was not “clearly established” in 2015. … were lawful in light of clearly established law.’”

    Cited 108 timesPublished
  • Gallant v. Cole <b> <font color="RED"> Do Not File in this Case - Case Consolidated, file in Case No. 18-CV-03241-SRB . </b> </font>

    District Court, W.D. Missouri · Nov 30, 2018

    that right was clearly established at the time of the employee’s firing.” … Regarding step two of the qualified immunity analysis, “[f]or a constitutional right to be clearly established, its contours ‘must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Kong v. Burnsville, City of

    District Court, D. Minnesota · Dec 14, 2018

    See Pearson, 555 U.S. at 237 (encouraging courts to decide qualified immunity defenses on the “clearly established “prong” when “it is plain that a constitutional right is not clearly established but far from obvious whether … judgment in a qualified immunity case.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Hill v. Rowe

    District Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 4, 2022

    Serpas, 745 F.3d 767, 771 (Sth Cir. 2014) (“Once the defendant raises the qualified immunity defense, ‘the burden shifts to the plaintiff to rebut this defense by establishing that the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct … violated clearly established law.’”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Boreen v. Christensen

    280 Mont. 378 · Montana Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1996

    s qualified immunity claim. … Because we hold that Boreen’s property interest in her employment was not clearly established in April of 1990, we need not reach the second prong of the Harlow test for granting qualified immunity.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Henry H. Amsden v. Thomas F. Moran, Etc.

    904 F.2d 748 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · May 29, 1990

    Qualified immunity shields government officials wielding discretionary powers “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … not necessarily entitled to prevail on the issue of qualified immunity- *752 Collins v.

    Cited 302 timesPublished
  • Devon W. Brown v. City of Atlanta

    Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 25, 2019

    With respect to such claim, the Officers would also have qualified immunity regarding their movement of chairs, looking behind counters, and looking into refrigerators as no clearly established precedent indicates that … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 641 (1987) (holding that an officer is entitled to qualified immunity if “a reasonable officer could have believed” that the search was lawful “in light of clearly established law and the information

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Amore v. Novarro

    624 F.3d 522 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 12, 2010

    (3) was clearly 8 established at the time that he was arrested." … Kurtzman, 411 U.S. 192, 207-08 (1973) that petitioners are entitled to qualified immunity on the ground that it was not clearly established at the time of the search that their conduct was unconstitutional

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Self, Carl v. Bates, Kelsey

    District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Mar 14, 2025

    Even if prison officials violate the Constitution, they are entitled to qualified immunity absent proof of a violation of clearly established law. Tousis v. Billiot, 84 F.4th 692, 698 (7th Cir. 2023). … Thus, the court must deny summary judgment as to both, including on qualified immunity grounds. See Hardeman v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Park County v. Cooney

    845 P.2d 346 · Wyoming Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1992

    Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 639-40 , 107 S.Ct. 3034, 3038-39 , 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987), the Court took up the question of what constitutes a “clearly established legal rule” for purposes of qualified immunity: The operation of … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • Luchtel v. Hagemann

    623 F.3d 975 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 7, 2010

    Luchtel has not shown that the use of the officers’ bodies and handcuffs in the manner deployed violated a clearly established constitutional right. See Pearson, 129 S.Ct. at 815 . … A reasonable police officer could properly believe that the use of this level of force would not violate a clearly established constitutional right. See Jackson, 268 F.3d at 653 n. 5; see also Malley v.

    Cited 100 timesPublished
  • Niewolak v. CITY OF HIGHLAND PARK, MI

    District Court, E.D. Michigan · Jul 19, 2022

    With respect to qualified immunity, as to the “clearly established” prong, “[t]he law is clear in this Circuit regarding the prohibition against excessively forceful handcuffing.” Baynes v. … City of Troy, 247 F.3d 633, 641 (6th Cir. 2001) (the right to be free from “excessively forceful handcuffing” is clearly established for qualified immunity purposes).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Doe v. Marsh

    105 F.3d 106 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 22, 1997

    "Even where the plaintiff's federal rights and the scope of the official's permissible conduct are clearly established, the qualified immunity defense protects a government actor if it was 'objectively reasonable' for him … 'clearly established' at the time [the action] was taken.")

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Michael Cantrell v. City of Murphy

    666 F.3d 911 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 4, 2012

    “[A]n official does not lose qualified immunity merely because a certain right is clearly established in the abstract.” Kinney, 367 F.3d at 350. … Stated differently, Matthew’s asserted right was not clearly established on October 2, 2007. Because this putative right was not clearly established, the Officers are entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 66 timesPublished

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.