Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1805

10,000+ results

4.40s

  • Young v. Gila Reg'l Med. Ctr.

    495 P.3d 620 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Jun 4, 2020

    (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the [alleged] conduct.” … Clearly Established {19} Having found that Plaintiff has established a constitutional violation, we turn next to the question of whether the law prohibiting the search was clearly established at the time it was conducted

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Layland v. Stevens

    171 P.3d 1070 · Wyoming Supreme Court · Dec 4, 2007

    These undisputed facts establish that the Secret Service agents are entitled to qualified immunity. … Layland argues that Deputy Stevens is not entitled to qualified immunity because it was clearly established and a reasonable officer would have known that entry onto Mr.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Shreve v. Jessamine County Fiscal Court

    453 F.3d 681 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 7, 2006

    Shreve has provided sufficient evidence of a violation of her clearly established constitutional right against the use of excessive police force in the course of arrest, and qualified immunity is not warranted under Saucier … Moreover, because Sixth Circuit case law supports Shreve’s right not to be struck and jumped on gratuitously, qualified immunity is not available for lack of a “clearly established” right. See Saucier, 533 U.S. at 200.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Poole v. Bishop

    District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 30, 2019

    Qualified Immunity Defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity from all of Poole’s claims.20 The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials … [qualified immunity] is effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial.” 20 Defendants do not argue why they are entitled to qualified immunity on a claim- by-claim basis.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Irish v. State of ME

    849 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 timesPublished
  • Wilson v. Osborn

    District 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 timesUnknown
  • Adamo v. Dillon

    900 F. Supp. 2d 499 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 16, 2012

    Defendant Dillon is entitled to Qualified Immunity because it is not clearly established that failing to hold a pre-ejection hearing [for Adamo] is a deprivation of Due Process. 15. … Defendant Dillon is entitled to Qualified Immunity because it is not clearly established that failing to hold a pre-ejection hearing [for Gill] is a deprivation of due process. 23.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • GARCIA v. Northside Independent School District

    District Court, W.D. Texas · Jun 23, 2025

    Unreasonable Seizure2 1 The Court’s analysis of the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis is not limited to the cas- es cited by Plaintiff. See Elder v. … Marcantel, 567 F.3d (5th Cir. 2009) as clearly establishing that an officer should receive no qualified immunity if he “quickly escalate[s]” an encounter with a non-threatening, passively-resisting driver who posed little

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Quinn v. Cardenas

    256 Ariz. 77 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Aug 1, 2023

    ¶37 Both federal and state qualified immunity require an analysis of whether Cardenas violated established law or unreasonably disregarded the unlawful nature of his conduct. … Those same conclusions—that Cardenas acted as a reasonable officer would and did not violate clearly established law—preclude the opposite finding in state court (i.e., a finding that Cardenas violated established law and

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Furlong v. Gardner

    1998 Colo. J. C.A.R. 1302 · Supreme Court of Colorado · Mar 23, 1998

    any clearly established right. … to support a violation of a clearly established law.”

    Cited 27 timesPublished
  • JONES v. United States

    District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 26, 2024

    Step One of the Qualified Immunity Doctrine and Deliberate Indifference to Serious Medical Needs The two-prong test for qualified immunity considers whether the facts … Qualified immunity protects a government official from civil liability and suit “insofar as [his] conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Florida Highway Patrol, a division etc. v. Lashonta Renea Jackson, as Per. Rep. etc.

    238 So. 3d 430 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 23, 2018

    Reeves, 80 F.3d 1101, 1104 (6th Cir. 1996) (“Hunter established that the determination of whether qualified immunity applies to an officer’s judgment as to probable cause is one for the court, not the jury, to make”); Ansley … This appears to be the analysis undertaken by Judge Rothenberg in Pozos when she concluded that the record “clearly established” the legal question of sovereign immunity. Pozos, 42 Fla. L.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Trellus Richmond v. Mario J. Badia

    47 F.4th 1172 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 22, 2022

    Richmond further argues that Badia’s actions violated his clearly established rights, such that Badia’s qualified immunity defense fails. … “A right may be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes in one of three ways: (1) [Eleventh Circuit or Supreme Court] case law with indistinguishable facts clearly establishing the constitu- tional right; (2)

    Cited 89 timesPublished
  • Lowe v. Raemisch

    864 F.3d 1205 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 25, 2017

    Even with this assumption, the two officials would enjoy qualified immunity unless the denial of outdoor exercise for two years and one month had violated a clearly established constitutional right. … established and the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. d.

    Cited 105 timesPublished
  • Ward v. Brown

    District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 3, 2022

    As to the second part of the qualified immunity analysis, the right Brown is accused of violating was clearly established long before the September 2017 fight that gave rise to this case. … violated a clearly established right.”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Tygrett v. City and County of Denver a/k/a Denver Water

    District Court, D. Colorado · Feb 26, 2020

    Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity protects from litigation a public official whose possible violation of a plaintiff’s civil rights was not clearly … that any constitutional violation was grounded in then- extant clearly established law.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • McCormick v. Board of Shawnee County Comm'rs

    272 Kan. 627 · Supreme Court of Kansas · Dec 7, 2001

    Waiver of qualified immunity. … fact, which if proven, would demonstrate a violation of clearly established law.

    Cited 35 timesPublished
  • McQueen v. Williams

    587 So. 2d 918 · Mississippi Supreme Court · Oct 16, 1991

    The state law and the affidavits submitted by [McQueen] clearly establish that the Sheriff's actions, as done in the totality of circumstances, were totally discretionary. … a claim of violation of clearly established law."

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Rockford Life Insurance v. Illinois Department of Revenue

    482 U.S. 182 · Supreme Court of the United States · Jun 8, 1987

    Davis is clearly lacking, and its absence is critical in view of the purposes behind the intergovernmental tax immunity doctrine. … H — < 1 — i A court must proceed carefully when asked to recognize an exemption from state taxation that Congress has not clearly established.

    Cited 51 timesPublished
  • Sause v. Bauer

    859 F.3d 1270 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 20, 2017

    First, she argues that the defendants aren’t entitled to qualified immunity because they violated her clearly established rights under the First Amendment. … Second, she argues that even assuming the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because the contours of that right aren’t clearly established, the doctrine of qualified immunity doesn’t shield them from her claims

    Reversed on other grounds by Sause v. Bauer, 138 S. Ct. 2561 (2018)Cited 12 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.