Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

10,000+ results

1.21s

  • Irwin v. Santiago

    District Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 8, 2021

    Nonetheless, because Irwin has not demonstrated that they violated clearly established law, the Court grants summary judgment to the Defendant–Officers based on qualified immunity.4 1. … The Defendant–Officers did not violate clearly established law.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Dicks Ex Rel. Montgomery v. Jenne

    740 So. 2d 576 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 21, 1999

    Initially, the trial court denied the motion, finding that Deputy Biernacki had "failed to establish his entitlement to qualified immunity as a matter of law, particularly in light of the court's prior ruling that the arrest … decision on the qualified immunity issue; and the record before this court does not support a finding that the prior rulings were clearly erroneous.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Moresi v. State, Dept. of Wildlife & Fisheries

    567 So. 2d 1081 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Sep 6, 1990

    Further, the defendants have clearly carried their burden of pleading qualified immunity. … If the defendant shows that the state constitutional right alleged to have been violated was not clearly established, the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 232 timesPublished
  • Starko, Inc. v. Gallegos

    140 N.M. 136 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Apr 26, 2006

    Qualified immunity should be recognized where, under the particular facts, it was objectively reasonable for the government official to believe that his or her acts did not violate a clearly established right. Yount v. … Holloway, 510 U.S. 510, 515 , 114 S.Ct. 1019 , 127 L.Ed.2d 344 (1994) (describing Davis as answering the “discrete question: Is qualified immunity defeated where a defendant violates any clearly established duty, including

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Autry v. Western Kentucky University

    219 S.W.3d 713 · Kentucky Supreme Court · Apr 19, 2007

    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 … Viewed in this light, WKU clearly is entitled to governmental immunity.

    Cited 66 timesPublished
  • Lorraine Gormley v. Latanya Wood-El (069717)

    218 N.J. 72 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 30, 2014

    It held, however, that those rights were not clearly established at the time of the assault on Gormley and therefore dismissed the claims against the officials on the ground of qualified immunity. 1 Gormley v. … The Appellate Division, nevertheless, concluded that that right was not clearly established at the time of the assault on Gormley and therefore granted defendants qualified immunity and dismissed the federal civil-rights

    Cited 212 timesPublished
  • Maness v. Daily

    307 P.3d 894 · Alaska Supreme Court · Aug 16, 2013

    Fitzgerald.17 Under this standard, qualified immunity shields public officials from civil liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … established.”27 In short, because Maness cannot show pursuant to his theory of liability that the troopers violated any of his clearly established rights, the troopers are protected by qualified immunity from Maness’s excessive

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Abouzari v. Foster

    14 Brief Times Rptr. 984 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Jul 19, 1990

    The plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that the applicable law was clearly established at the time in question, and the failure to establish a clearly existing constitutional standard derived from authority in a … a jury question on the issue of qualified immunity.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • McBeth v. Himes

    598 F.3d 708 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 8, 2010

    violated clearly established law.” … Himes contends, however, that even if he possessed a retaliatory motive when he spoke to DHS, he is nevertheless entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate any clearly established constitutional right of

    Cited 135 timesPublished
  • Daniels, Michael v. Knight, Stanley

    Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 5, 2007

    The Strickland framework was clearly established by the time the Indiana trial court denied Daniels’ first post-conviction appeal on February 21, 1985. … See Williams, 529 U.S. at 391 (“It is past question No. 05-2620 13 that the rule set forth in Strickland qualifies as ‘clearly established Federal law, as determined by the

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Payne v. Breuer

    891 S.W.2d 200 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 19, 1994

    In the case under submission, Breuer chose the latter and attempted to establish the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … Thus, we hold that Breuer’s actions were not objectively reasonable under clearly established law. Therefore, Breuer is not entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • James A. Conrad v. New Hampshire Department of Safety & a.

    167 N.H. 59 · Supreme Court of New Hampshire · Nov 6, 2014

    Qualified immunity protects police officers “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … It is clear from the Supreme Court’s description of the second, “clearly established” step of the qualified immunity analysis that the second step, in turn, has two aspects.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Daniels v. CITY OF HARTFORD, ALA.

    645 F. Supp. 2d 1036 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Aug 18, 2009

    In the context of qualified immunity cases that turn on the presence or absence of probable cause, an official has not committed a clearly established constitutional violation if either actual or arguable probable cause existed … a clearly established constitutional right. 12 Thus, the Court finds that Sheriff Olsen is protected from suit for the conditions of confinement at the Dale County Detention Facility by the doctrine of qualified immunity

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • McGarry v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners for the Cnty. of Lincoln

    294 F. Supp. 3d 1170 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Feb 28, 2018

    The Court concludes that: (i) Wood used excessive force, but he is entitled to qualified immunity, because the right was not clearly established; (ii) the Officers are entitled to qualified immunity on the malicious prosecution … Although the Tenth Circuit has recognized a sliding scale for qualified immunity's clearly established inquiry, see Casey v.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Eric Earnest, Jr. v. Genesee Cnty., Mich.

    Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 28, 2021

    constitutional right; and (2) the right was clearly established.” … clearly established).

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Linn v. Louisiana Workforce Commission

    District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jan 10, 2024

    Title I of the ADA prohibits states from “discriminat[ing] against a qualified individual on the basis of disability in regard to job application procedures, the hiring, advancement, or discharge of employees, employee … Ctr., 307 F.3d 318, 326 n.1 (5th Cir. 2002) (finding that the Fifth Circuit has “long recognized that Congress has clearly abrogated the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity in enacting Title VII”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Hsien I. Peng v. Mei Chin Penghu Jonathan Hu S. Gage, Los Angeles County Deputy, Badge No. 406857, Sued Individually

    335 F.3d 970 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 10, 2003

    The first order granted Deputy Gage qualified immunity from suit. … Qualified Immunity Next, we address whether Gage was properly'granted qualified immunity.

    Abrogated on other grounds by Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009)Cited 112 timesPublished
  • United States v. Bennett

    868 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jul 5, 2017

    On that basis, we held that the defendant's conviction could not qualify as a conviction for a crime that had as an element the "use . . . of physical force" because the "government ha[d] not established the offense of harmful … If anything, then, the force clause in § 16 would seem to be less clearly encompassing of reckless conduct than the residual clause in § 16.

    Vacated by United States v. Bennett, 870 F.3d 34 (2017)Cited 42 timesPublished
  • Brescher v. Pirez

    696 So. 2d 370 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 30, 1997

    questionable conduct violated clearly established law. … the plaintiff's rights in light of clearly established law.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Crystal Starnes v. Butler County Court of Common

    971 F.3d 416 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 24, 2020

    s] of Appeals could clearly establish a right for purposes of qualified immunity.” … The District Court defined the violative conduct too broadly for qualified immunity purposes. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. at 742 (warning courts not to define clearly established law at “a high level of generality”).

    Cited 122 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.