Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
4.24s
Hutchison v. City of Huntington
198 W. Va. 139 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1996
in light of clearly established law, to a given (for purposes of appeal) set of facts. … When dealing with hroad rights, the plaintiff bears the burden of particularizing such a right before those rights are subject to the qualified immunity test of being clearly established.
Cited 180 timesPublished191 F. Supp. 3d 198 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 8, 2016
Was the Right Clearly Established The second step in qualified immunity analysis is to determine whether the constitutional or statutory right was clearly established at the time that it was violated. … Therefore, the constitutional right in question was not clearly established, and individual Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 6 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 9, 2022
Qualified Immunity Osborn argues that she is entitled to summary judgment with respect to both of Wilson’s claims on the basis of qualified immunity.13 The qualified immunity … “[A]n arresting [officer] is entitled to qualified immunity if he or she could reasonably (even if erroneously) have believed that the arrest was lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information possessed
Cited 0 timesUnknownFrank Steffensen v. Casey Mayhew
452 F. App'x 793 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 7, 2011
The district court properly granted summary judgment to Mayhew on the basis of qualified immunity because Mayhew’s authorization of a probationary search of a vehicle was not a clear violation of Steffensen’s Fourth Amendment … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 243-44 (2009) (qualified immunity shields “an officer from personal liability when an officer reasonably believes that his or her conduct complies with the law,” and “where clearly established law
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedKeith 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 timesUnpublished196 F.R.D. 43 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Jul 19, 2000
The work product doctrine is not a "privilege,” but a sort of "qualified immunity” from discovery, originally established in Hickman v.
Cited 13 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · May 13, 2022
Purnell, 652 F.3d 524, 531 (4th Cir. 2011) (en banc) (“Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably believe that their … right and (2) ‘whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.’”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Alabama · Aug 1, 2019
Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from individual capacity suits unless the official violates “clearly established statutory … So, the burden then shifts to Plaintiffs to establish that qualified immunity is not appropriate in this case.
Cited 0 timesUnknown446 Mass. 525 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Apr 13, 2006
was clearly established at the time of the alleged constitutional violation. … Indeed, an “unresolved” constitutional right, like the one presented in this case, cannot be “clearly established,” as required under the second prong of the qualified immunity test. See, e.g., Wilson v.
Cited 103 timesPublishedDistrict Court, D. Maryland · Sep 30, 2019
The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … he sat restrained in handcuffs— was not clearly established at the time of the incident.
Cited 0 timesUnknown614 F.3d 713 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 2, 2010
In a qualified-immunity setting, the plaintiff bears the burden of showing that the constitutional right alleg- edly violated was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct. See Landstrom v. Ill. … Oest is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. Despite being aware of the potential conflict of interest, Lunn and Vicini are also entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 72 timesPublished55 F.3d 436 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 16, 1995
As to the § 1983 claims stemming from Fordyce’s arrest, we agree with the district court that the officers are entitled to qualified immunity from suit for damages. Act Up!/Portland v. … Accordingly, all the individual police officer defendants are entitled to qualified immunity with respect to Fordyee’s § 1983 damages claims relating to his arrest.
Cited 122 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 6, 2023
On the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis (i.e., whether the right in question was clearly established), the court denied Wells qualified immunity by “conclud[ing] that an inmate’s right to adequate medical … “But, to overcome qualified immunity, the plaintiff’s version of those disputed facts must also constitute a violation of clearly established law.” Id.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · Mar 31, 2022
immunities established at common law. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, an official is immune from liability “only when in light of clearly established law and the information the official possesses, it was objectively reasonable for him to think that
Cited 0 timesUnknown368 F. Supp. 3d 573 · District Court, W.D. New York · Mar 18, 2019
"Qualified immunity insulates public officials from claims for damages where their conduct does not violate 'clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.' " Defore … Accordingly, the Court finds the relevant law as to the SHU lighting conditions was not clearly established at the time of Plaintiff's incarceration at the Monroe County Jail, and Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity
Cited 29 timesPublished114 Nev. 55 · Nevada Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1998
Under the qualified immunity doctrine, “government officials performing discretionary functions . . . are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … The pertinent inquiry in determining whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity for a Fourth Amendment violation is whether a reasonable officer could have believed his conduct lawful under the clearly established
Abrogated in part, on other grounds by Martinez v. Maruszczak, 123 Nev. 433 (2007)Cited 27 timesPublished439 F.3d 818 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 3, 2006
The doctrine of qualified immunity protects governmental officials from civil liability when “ ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … was one of clearly established law.
Cited 33 timesPublishedConstantine v. Rectors and Visitors of George Mason University
411 F.3d 474 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 13, 2005
In the qualified-immunity context, the Supreme Court has stressed "the importance of resolving immunity questions at the earliest possible stage in litigation." Saucier v. … GMU waived whatever Eleventh Amendment immunity it had when it accepted federal funds under a statute that clearly and unambiguously conditioned receipt of such funds on a waiver of immunity.
Cited 931 timesPublished849 F.3d 521 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Mar 1, 2017
come away understanding that it [wa]s not a clearly established violation of Ms. … Lewis, 648 F.3d 24, 32 (1st Cir. 2011) (qualified immunity protects officers from liability "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established . . . constitutional rights of which a reasonable
Cited 33 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 2020
Darrah would be entitled to qualified immunity if reasonable officials in her position “could have believed, in light of clearly established law, that their conduct comported with established legal standards.” … Supp. at 335 (“A qualified immunity only protects defendants if it can be shown that they did not violate any clearly established constitutional or statutory rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna