Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1915

10,000+ results

2.35s

  • Hamrick v. State

    426 S.C. 638 · Supreme Court of South Carolina · May 15, 2019

    Accident reconstruction requires expertise,6 and from the outset, the State sought to establish Officer Harris's qualifications as an expert in accident reconstruction. … Second, the trial court failed to make the necessary findings that the State established the foundation required by Rule 702. See Council, 335 S.C. at 20, 515 S.E.2d at 518.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • The Estate of Roosevelt Holliman v. Turner

    District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Sep 1, 2023

    constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … Once qualified immunity has been “raised as a defense by a defendant, … the plaintiffs have the burden of establishing the proof and arguments necessary to overcome it.” Strickland v. City of Crenshaw, 114 F.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Benjamin v. Washington State Bar Ass'n

    980 P.2d 742 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 22, 1999

    No qualified immunity for violation of a clearly established right. Harwick's threshold defense is qualified immunity. [1] Harlow v. … Clearly, qualified immunity is appropriate only where assertions of fact by the plaintiff do not rise to the level of a clearly established constitutional violation.

    Cited 42 timesPublished
  • HINDMAN v. CITY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA

    District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 16, 2024

    The basis for his assertion is strangely worded, but he appears to be arguing that the constitutional right was not “clearly established” at the time he acted because “[t]here is no clearly established right to be free … the defendant’s conduct violated a clearly established right.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Knight v. State of Oklahoma

    District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Apr 12, 2022

    Qualified Immunity – Scully and Sugg Defendants Scully and Sugg also have pending a motion to dismiss, making various arguments including that their actions are shielded by qualified immunity. … Jordan, 958 F.2d 332, 336 (10th Cir. 1992) (noting discovery should not be allowed until the court resolves the threshold question of clearly established law).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Donnetta Smith v. Stoneburner

    716 F.3d 926 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 10, 2013

    In this qualified immunity case, as in all qualified immunity cases, two questions arise: whether the officers violated the Smiths’ constitutional rights, and if so whether those rights were clearly established at the time … Two appellate decisions, it is true, granted qualified immunity to officers on not- clearly-established grounds, but they each involved a fact pattern at least one prominent step removed from this one. In Malachowski v.

    Cited 49 timesPublished
  • Stevens v. Stearns

    175 Vt. 428 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Aug 1, 2003

    Plaintiffs argue that issue preclusion is inappropriate here because the standard for establishing qualified immunity in cases involving alleged violations of Chapter I, Article Eleven of the Vermont Constitution should be … The federal court assessed defendants’ actions in light of this “clearly established” right. We are asked to conduct the same analysis here. *437 ¶ 23.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Frasier v. Evans

    992 F.3d 1003 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 29, 2021

    Frasier’s clearly established First Amendment rights—and the district court itself said they did not—then the officers are entitled to qualified immunity. … - established-law component of the qualified-immunity standard.

    Cited 81 timesPublished
  • Romero v. Sanchez

    119 N.M. 690 · New Mexico Supreme Court · Apr 24, 1995

    Believing Officer Sanchez violated clearly established law, we held that he was not entitled to qualified immunity. … The Act was passed prior to the genesis of the modern qualified immunity law established in Harlow.

    Cited 29 timesPublished
  • Collvins v. Hackford

    523 F. App'x 515 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 3, 2013

    To defeat a defense of qualified immunity on summary judgment, however, the plaintiff carries the burden of establishing that the defendant violated a constitutional right which was clearly established. … The district court held that because there is no clearly established law indicating that the delay in Mr. Collvins’ hearing was unconstitutional, he was entitled to qualified immunity. Again, we agree.

    Cited 6 timesUnpublished
  • Williams v. The City of Jackson

    District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Sep 29, 2021

    that defeat a qualified[-]immunity defense with equal specificity.” … that the law is clearly established”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Smith v. Washtenaw Intermediate School District

    District Court, E.D. Michigan · Jan 24, 2020

    Qualified immunity will apply when the injury Plaintiff alleges is taken by the collective action of Defendants, not individual defendants. See Humphrey v. … Mabry, 482 F.3d 840, 847 (6th Cir. 2007) (individual officers are entitled to qualified immunity even when they collectively had sufficient knowledge to figure out that they were violating the plaintiff’s clearly established

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Gentile v. Bauder

    718 So. 2d 781 · Supreme Court of Florida · Sep 24, 1998

    Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from civil damages to the extent that "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … probable cause under clearly established precedent.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • City of Highfill, Arkansas; Jeffery Brenaman, in His Official and Individual Capacities; And Mayor Michelle Rieff, in Her Official and Individual Capacities v. Shana Scantlin and Tammy Ridenhour

    2025 Ark. App. 242 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 23, 2025

    is clearly established, and (3) raised a genuine issue of fact as to whether the official would have known that the conduct violated that clearly established right. … Under our qualified-immunity analysis, however, we agree that even if Scantlin and Ridenhour have asserted a violation of a clearly established right under the Act, they have failed to raise a genuine issue of fact as to

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Junior v. Reed

    693 So. 2d 586 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 20, 1997

    The trial court should have sustained Commissioner Junior's claim of qualified immunity, however, because the conduct forming the basis of the complaint by the Reeds does not amount to a violation of a clearly established … To qualify as a "clearly established" right as that phrase is used in Harlow v.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • City of Lakewood v. Brace

    20 Brief Times Rptr. 981 · Supreme Court of Colorado · Jun 24, 1996

    violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … immunity to appeal a district court’s denial of summary judgment on that defense if the issue on appeal is whether the constitutional right that was allegedly violated was “clearly established.”

    Cited 51 timesPublished
  • Commonwealth v. Robinson

    399 Pa. Super. 199 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 5, 1990

    Appellant’s second issue relates to the expert testimony offered by the Commonwealth to establish that the drugs possessed by appellant were for delivery to others, rather than for personal use. … If accepted by the jury, as it clearly was, it provided an adequate basis upon which to conclude that the Commonwealth proved the intent to deliver element of the crime charged. Commonwealth v.

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Lawson v. S.W.V.R.J.A.

    District Court, W.D. Virginia · Feb 3, 2020

    Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 736 (2002) (“The threshold inquiry a court must undertake in a qualified immunity analysis is whether plaintiff’s allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation.”) … Furthermore, “[u]nless 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 0 timesUnknown
  • D.M. v. State

    25 Neb. Ct. App. 596 · Nebraska Court of Appeals · Mar 13, 2018

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity provides a shield from liability for public officials sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) in their individual capacities, so long as the official's conduct does not violate clearly established … Next, we consider whether this right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Price v. Davis

    132 N.C. App. 556 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 16, 1999

    , and qualified immunity. … to qualified immunity.

    Cited 47 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.