Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
3.92s
Ian Tuuamalemalo v. Shahann Greene
946 F.3d 471 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 24, 2019
established law, whether the law clearly proscribed the actions the defendant claims he took. … Scott moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity.
Cited 86 timesPublished241 Wis. 2d 153 · Wisconsin Supreme Court · Feb 16, 2001
Cooper and Stoudt were not entitled to qualified immunity because Powell's due process claims were grounded on clearly established property and liberty interests. Id. at 19. ¶ 12. … When qualified immunity is raised as an affirmative defense, the plaintiff has the burden of demonstrating by closely analogous case law that the defendant violated a clearly established constitutional right.
Cited 3 timesPublished256 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 timesPublishedGARCIA 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 timesUnknown864 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 timesPublished446 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 timesPublishedGrix v. Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission
821 So. 2d 315 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 22, 2002
The court also found that qualified immunity shielded the officer from. liability under section 1983 because he did not violate a clearly established law concerning proper.net measurements when stopping and detaining appellant … Therefore, Millender did not “clearly establish” the method of measuring such nets.
Cited 1 timesPublishedDistrict 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 timesUnknownDistrict 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 timesUnknownTygrett 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 timesUnknown52 F. Supp. 2d 611 · District Court, D. South Carolina · May 19, 1999
Although the right to due process of law, for example, is quite clearly established, the qualified immunity analysis law is not “to be applied at this level of generality.” Anderson v. … The court notes that the Kopf case, upon which the Vathekan court relied for its clearly established law, did not involve an assertion of the qualified immunity defense.
Cited 18 timesPublished975 F.3d 327 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 16, 2020
In the familiar qualified immunity analysis, the court asks “(1) whether the officer violated a constitutional right, and (2) whether the right was clearly established, such that ‘it would [have been] clear to a reasonable … of the qualified immunity analysis: “whether the right was clearly established.”
Cited 132 timesPublished477 N.W.2d 176 · North Dakota Supreme Court · Nov 12, 1991
action is a violation) violates a clearly established right. … When a court is faced with a motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, the court must first determine whether or not the alleged conduct of the defendant was violative of "clearly established" law.
Cited 11 timesPublished963 F.3d 259 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 29, 2020
Accordingly, the District Court denied Defendants qualified immunity for conduct alleged to have occurred after Helling, decided on June 18, 1993, finding the right to be clearly established as of that date. … In denying defendants qualified immunity on this claim, we first noted that a prisoner’s right to a meaningful opportunity for physical exercise had been clearly established since 1985. Id. at *6 (citing Anderson v.
Cited 151 timesPublishedJefferson County Fiscal Court v. Peerce
132 S.W.3d 824 · Kentucky Supreme Court · Feb 23, 2004
is inapplicable to his § 1983 claims and qualified immunity does not protect the individually-named official Appellants because their actions clearly violated Appellee’s well-established statutory and constitutional rights … Conversely, if the official’s actions violated a clearly established right or law, the immunity is lost and the official is hable for the violation.
Cited 46 timesPublished474 F. App'x 673 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 23, 2012
The district court properly held that defendant prison officials were entitled to qualified immunity because Bardo did not have a clearly established First Amendment right to retain the ad depicting side-view nudity. … Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 739 (2002) (“For a constitutional right to be clearly established, its contours must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.”
Cited 1 timesUnpublished338 F.3d 23 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 11, 2003
Qualified immunity is available to the defendants if, at the time of the alleged violations, the law was not clearly established. See id. … The law was clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity. 3.
Cited 0 timesPublished126 N.C. App. 712 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 15, 1997
Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … However, qualified immunity could operate to shield Swain and McCracken from plaintiff’s damages suit “if ‘a reasonable officer could have believed’ ” plaintiff’s arrest “ ‘to be lawful, in light of clearly established law
Cited 13 timesPublishedLeonard v. St. Charles County Police Department
District Court, E.D. Missouri · Nov 5, 2021
The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability when their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Further, to overcome qualified immunity, precedent must have clearly established that each Individual Defendant’s own actions “in the particular circumstances” at issue violated Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights.
Cited 0 timesUnknown117 N.M. 95 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Nov 22, 1993
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Government officials are entitled to summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity, provided that their actions are objectively reasonable in the light of clearly established law. Harlow v. … We first note that the allegedly violated law that must be clearly established in the context of a qualified-immunity analysis is federal law, not state law. Estate of Himelstein v.
Cited 21 timesPublished
Ask Donna