Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
3.13s
District Court, E.D. Michigan · Sep 16, 2019
Qualified immunity protects state actors from liability unless they violate “clearly established” federal law at the time they acted. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982). … Taking the second qualified immunity question first, Plaintiff had a clearly established constitutional right under the Equal Protection Clause not to be discriminated against by the City on the basis of race
Cited 0 timesUnknownPachote v. County of Contra Costa
District Court, N.D. California · Nov 3, 2023
Qualified Immunity. 20 Nelson and Thomas also contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity on Pachote’s 21 Section 1983 claims. … The doctrine of “qualified immunity shields individual officers from 22 liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct did not violate clearly established constitutional 23 rights of which a reasonable person
Cited 0 timesUnknown225 Ariz. 484 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Sep 28, 2010
Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability if a reasonable government official could have believed his actions to be lawful, in the light of clearly established law and the information he possessed … Officials are entitled to the protections of qualified immunity, unless “the law clearly proscribed the actions” that were taken. Mitchell v.
Cited 2 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 timesPublished74 F.3d 977 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 30, 1996
When a law enforcement officer asserts qualified immunity from liability, “the district court must determine whether, in light of clearly established principles governing the conduct in question, the officer objectively could … The second step of analysis for a qualified immunity determination is whether under the clearly established law a reasonable officer could have believed that his conduct was lawful. Act Up!/Portland, 988 F.2d at 871 .
Abrogated on other grounds by Mary Gordon v. County of Orange, 888 F.3d 1118 (2018)Cited 58 timesPublished83 F.4th 743 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 29, 2023
Because Plaintiffs fail to show that Defendants’ conduct violated clearly established law, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the First Amendment claims. … “[I]n the absence of binding precedent, we look to whatever decisional law is available to ascertain whether the law is clearly established for qualified immunity purposes . . . .” Id.
Cited 23 timesPublished114 N.M. 607 · New Mexico Supreme Court · Aug 28, 1992
Applying this proposition to a request for qualified immunity, we examine whether the opposing party has presented evidence to support a violation of clearly established law, so as to require a trial on the merits. … Finding that plaintiff had this clearly established right, however, does not quite dispose of the qualified-immunity issue in this case, because in order to determine whether defendants unconstitutionally infringed her right
Cited 75 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 30, 2007
To defeat qualified immunity, “the right allegedly violated must be defined at the appropriate level of specificity before a court can determine if it was clearly established.” Wilson v. … Thus, there are two bodies of law from which we might draw “clearly established” law for qualified immunity pur- poses: first, where the SVPs claim a violation of a right that is clearly established even in the prison context
Cited 0 timesPublished803 F. Supp. 103 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 16, 1992
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Prison officials performing discretionary duties are entitled to qualified immunity if their actions do not violate clearly established constitutional law of which a reasonable prison official would have … Once a defendant raises a qualified immunity argument in a motion for summary judgement, a plaintiff must satisfy a two prong test: “First, the allegations must state a claim of violation of clearly established law.
Cited 5 timesPublishedFred Watson v. Eddie Boyd, III
2 F.4th 1106 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 30, 2021
or statutory right; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.’” … Accordingly, because of the district court’s incomplete analysis on both the constitutional violation and clearly established prongs, we can neither affirm nor reverse the denial of qualified immunity.
Cited 52 timesPublishedBrodie Faughn and Billy Colvin v. Alfred Kennedy and Wayne Kennedy
2019 Ark. App. 570 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Dec 4, 2019
Qualified immunity protects an officer from liability in an excessive-force case unless the officer’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known … The second step of the qualified-immunity inquiry—whether the constitutional or statutory right was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct— requires the victim to point to a previously decided
Cited 3 timesPublished687 F. App'x 587 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 18, 2017
Qualified immunity should not be available to Defendant Heather Smith for violating Marble’s clearly established due process right to question the witness upon which the allegation of a parole violation was based. … His clearly established right to a hearing was effectively vitiated. Applying the doctrine of qualified immunity in this situation serves no legitimate purpose.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedDontrell 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 timesPublishedAscent Energy, LLC v. Reach Wireline, LLC
District Court, D. New Mexico · Aug 18, 2021
to dismiss that attack the Court’s jurisdiction or motions for summary judgment which raise qualified immunity, would be contrary to the disfavored status of stays. Id. at 5 (citing New Mexico ex rel. … Courts do routinely stay discovery for summary judgment motions on the basis of qualified immunity, and for motions to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds. See, e.g., Workman v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 11, 2008
But the court denied the defendants’ request for qualified immunity on Back’s political-affiliation claims, holding that Back had adequately alleged a clearly established constitutional violation. … P. 12(b)(6), so we review an assertion of qualified immunity to determine only whether the complaint “adequately alleges the commission of acts that violated clearly established law,” Mitchell v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · Dec 13, 2019
Qualified Immunity Although qualified immunity is expansive, a government official “who performs an act clearly established to be beyond the scope of his discretionary authority” is not entitled … Qualified Immunity In contrast to Count One, Count Three involves a public employer’s well-established authority to limit employees’ speech, so qualified immunity applies.
Cited 0 timesUnknownTown of Southwest Ranches v. Kalam
980 So. 2d 1121 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 12, 2008
a clearly established right). … As Kalam’s complaint fails to show that the town officials’ conduct violated his rights in light of clearly established law, the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from suit.
Cited 2 timesPublishedWilliams v. Mississippi Department of Public Safety
District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Jul 7, 2025
Reaching only the first element, the Court finds Williams has not sufficiently rebutted qualified immunity “by establishing that [Tindell’s] allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law.” , 117 F.3d … Reaching only the first element, the Court finds Williams has not sufficiently rebutted qualified immunity “by establishing that [Tindell’s] allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law.” , 117 F.3d at 872
Cited 0 timesUnknownTexas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Mar 3, 2005
purported expert is qualified. … that the person rendering the opinion . . . is a qualified medical expert.”)
Cited 0 timesPublishedKeith Hardesty v. Waterworks District 4 of Ward
621 F. App'x 771 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 14, 2015
“[A] defendant cannot be said to have violated a clearly established right unless the right’s misconduct through the lens of the “objective reasonableness”/”clearly established law” prong of the qualified immunity analysis … the Board Defendants qualified immunity.
Cited 15 timesUnpublished
Ask Donna