Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
3.92s
Georgia Carry Org, Inc. v. Brian Kabler
580 F. App'x 695 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2014
However, because Kabler was a government official acting within his discretionary authority, we must view this question through the lens of the qualified-immunity doctrine, which immunizes such a government official from … liability unless his conduct violates clearly-established 4 Case: 14-11225 Date Filed: 08/29/2014 Page: 5 of 8 federal law.
Cited 1 timesUnpublishedBarnhill v. Board of Regents of the UW System
166 Wis. 2d 395 · Wisconsin Supreme Court · Feb 12, 1992
From Anderson , we glean several guidelines concerning the level of generality afforded to "clearly established law" in the qualified immunity determination. … Merely alleging a general violation of a right that may be clearly established by the constitution or a statute is insufficient clarity of established law to justify withholding qualified immunity.
Cited 15 timesPublishedRosenberger v. Kootenai County Sheriff's Department
140 Idaho 853 · Idaho Supreme Court · Dec 17, 2004
If A Constitutional Right Was Arguably Violated, The Right Was Not Clearly Established. … based on qualified immunity is proper.
Cited 6 timesPublished596 F. Supp. 96 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 22, 1984
Whether an official may prevail in his qualified immunity defense depends upon the “objective reasonableness of [his] conduct as measured by reference to clearly established law.” ... … No other “circumstances” are relevant to the issue of qualified immunity. We conclude that the District Court correctly held that appellee has demonstrated no violation of his clearly established constitutional rights.
Cited 2 timesPublishedDillon Burnett v. Josh Griffith
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 12, 2022
Whether Sergeant Griffith is entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil-damages liability for violations of “clearly established statutory or constitutional … established” prong of the qualified-immunity analysis.
Cited 0 timesPublishedESTATE OF ANDRE ALEXANDER GREEN v. CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS
District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 13, 2019
Qualified immunity “[Q]ualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Dkt. 38 at 30.1 The Court exercises its discretion to begin with the second, “clearly established law” prong of the qualified-immunity test. See Pearson, 555 U.S. at 236. Mr.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, D. Alaska · Jan 3, 2020
Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government actors from civil liability under § 1983 if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … City of Fresno, 918 F.3d 1031, 1035 (9th Cir. 2019). 67 See Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232 (“Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right
Cited 0 timesUnknown888 F.3d 259 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 19, 2018
That decision itself does not involve a pure legal issue regarding qualified immunity, i.e., whether the officers violated Jackson’s clearly established constitutional rights. … plausibly violated clearly established rights.
Cited 109 timesPublished170 F. Supp. 3d 915 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Mar 21, 2016
Defendants’ have failed to establish Qualified Immunity Howard, Ball, Cook, and McKinley assert that qualified immunity shields them from liability for their actions. Dkt. 28 at 4.. … established' for purposes of qualified immunity.
Cited 5 timesPublished216 F. Supp. 3d 590 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 25, 2016
Citizens have a clearly established right to be free from excessive force while restrained. 57 In light of this clearly established right, district courts tend to deny qualified immunity in cases where the reasonableness … Conclusion We are not aware of a clearly established right for a citizen not to be restrained while suffering a grand mal seizure. We apply qualified immunity to Mr. Guthrie’s Fourth Amendment seizure claim.
Cited 6 timesPublished94 N.E.3d 325 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 5, 2018
And the burden is on the plaintiff to demonstrate the violation of a clearly established right. Id. … immunity because there were clearly established doctrines at the time as to what actions a caseworker must take when conducting an investigation)
Cited 3 timesPublishedDontrell Stephens v. Ric Bradshaw
879 F.3d 1157 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 10, 2018
the allegedly violated right was clearly established by governing case law. … Yet, Deputy Lin would still be entitled to qualified immunity if the law were not clearly established.
Cited 56 timesPublishedCaneyville Volunteer Fire Department v. Green's Motorcycle Salvage, Inc.
286 S.W.3d 790 · Kentucky Supreme Court · Jun 25, 2009
However, even if an act is discretionary, there is no immunity if it violates constitutional, statutory, or other clearly established rights, or if it is done willfully or maliciously with intent to harm, or if it is committed … Accordingly, in order to charge liability, a complainant may not merely allege injury, but must point to “a causally related Violation of a constitutional, statutory, or other clearly established right,’ ” Sloas, 201 S.W.3d
Cited 72 timesPublished299 Conn. 196 · Supreme Court of Connecticut · Dec 14, 2010
The court further explained that, under federal law, the doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil actions arising out of their discretionary acts if such acts did not violate clearly established … clearly established law.
Cited 51 timesPublishedDistrict Court, D. Kansas · May 30, 2024
Kooser and Huffman invoke qualified immunity in response to Blanton’s claim. Doc. 18 at 6, 10. Qualified immunity attempts to bal- ance competing interests. … If she states a constitutional claim, the next question is whether the law was clearly established. Discerning whether the relevant legal rule was clearly established is a narrow and context-specific exercise.
Cited 0 timesUnknown128 N.M. 28 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Jul 15, 1999
The defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff demonstrates that the federal right so violated was a right “clearly established” at the time of the alleged violation. See Harlow v. … clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”
Cited 17 timesPublished132 Pa. Commw. 255 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 1990
The present standard for determining if qualified immunity applies was first established in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), in which case the U.S. … Supreme Court stated that qualified immunity will be found if an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established rights which a reasonable person should have known. Id. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. at 2738 .
Cited 33 timesPublishedLatonya Burton v. West Virginia Division of Corrections and John and Jane Does
Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia · Jun 27, 2025
Burton failed to plead that the respondents were in violation of a clearly established right. … The question as to whether an employee was acting within the scope of their employment relates to qualified immunity as follows: If the plaintiff identifies a clearly established right or law which has been
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Jul 31, 2025
Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, a plaintiff may not obtain damages for a constitutional violation against a public official unless the plaintiff shows that the official violated clearly established … For purposes of qualified immunity, that legal duty need not be litigated and then established disease by disease or injury by injury.”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, D. Colorado · Dec 14, 2023
Once a defendant has asserted a defense of qualified immunity, the burden shifts to the plaintiff, who must establish that (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) the right was clearly established at … Larsen, the Tenth Circuit did not expressly discuss the federal doctrine of qualified immunity or whether it was clearly established that reckless driving could violate the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna