Case law

Huffmier v. Hamilton

30 Kan. App. 2d 1163 · Court of Appeals of Kansas · Oct 25, 2002

established law.” … Second, was the constitutional right clearly established? See McCormick, 272 Kan. at 642 .

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.

Lucas v. Otsego County Sheriff Richard J. Devlin Jr.

139 A.D.3d 1196 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 12, 2016

Supreme Court determined that, among other things, defendants were shielded from liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity and granted their motion. Plaintiff now appeals. We affirm. … Defendants nevertheless have qualified immunity for their conduct if they did "not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known" (Mullenix v Luna, US

Wright v. City Of Philadelphia

409 F.3d 595 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 6, 2005

facts showed a violation of `clearly established' law." … violated was clearly established.

James v. Lee

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 1, 2020

Qualified Immunity 21 “Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly 22 established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … “Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate 17 clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

Herndon v. Henderson Police Department

District Court, D. Nevada · Sep 23, 2023

Defendants are nonetheless entitled to 8 qualified immunity because Plaintiff has not demonstrated that the right was clearly 9 established. … to be clearly established.

Barnes v. Fedele

337 F. Supp. 3d 227 · District Court, W.D. New York · Oct 2, 2018

DISCUSSION Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability for civil damages "if his conduct did not violate plaintiff's *231 clearly established rights or if it would have been objectively reasonable for … The qualified immunity defense in this case largely turns on two considerations: whether the statutory or constitutional right in question was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation, and, if so, whether

Richard Wesley v. Alison Campbell

864 F.3d 433 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 20, 2017

“Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability for civil damages if their conduct does not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” … To determine whether Rigney is entitled to qualified immunity, we must determine whether the facts within the trial record make out a violation of a constitutional right, and whether that right was clearly established “such

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

Hale v. Walterbach

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 24, 2024

To defeat qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show: “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right; and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct … “If the defendant’s actions violated a clearly established constitutional right” courts examine “whether qualified immunity is still appropriate because the defendant’s actions were objectively reasonable in light

Long v. Boucher

District Court, D. Utah · Nov 24, 2020

To overcome this defense, a plaintiff must establish that the officer asserting qualified immunity “violated a federal statutory or constitutional right” and that “the unlawfulness of [her] conduct was clearly established … The court must accordingly turn to whether Detective Boucher is entitled to qualified immunity on the ground that her actions were objectively reasonable in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the

Harrison v. Kernan

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 21, 2021

Ct. 26 831 (Jan. 23, 2017) (qualified immunity looks at whether the right was clearly established when the defendant acted). … See e.g., S.B., 864 F.3d at 1015 (qualified 7 immunity looks at whether the right was clearly established when the defendant acted).

Dickson v. City of Clovis

148 N.M. 831 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Apr 1, 2010

It granted Defendant Parkin qualified immunity, determining that “there was no apparent violation of a clearly established constitutional right” because it was reasonable for Defendant Parkin to have been uncertain as to … , granted Defendant Parkin qualified immunity, which entitled him to summary judgment as a matter of law.

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.

Julie Ballou v. James McElvain

29 F.4th 413 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 28, 2021

As Ballou’s disparate treatment claim alleged that McElvain violated her clearly established rights under the Equal Protection Clause, McElvain was not entitled to qualified immunity on that claim. … As Ballou’s disparate treatment claim alleged that McElvain violated her clearly established rights under the Equal Protection Clause, McElvain is not entitled to qualified immunity on that claim.

Birdo v. Gomez

214 F. Supp. 3d 709 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 17, 2016

qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

Arlane James v. New Jersey State Police

957 F.3d 165 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 21, 2020

Qualified immunity protects government officials from being held liable for damages when their conduct does not violate a citizen’s clearly established rights. … Trooper Bartelt is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate Gibbons’s clearly established rights.

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

DeWald v. State

719 P.2d 643 · Wyoming Supreme Court · May 23, 1986

City of Green River, supra, does not establish a qualified immunity for the act of driving a patrol car. … Clearly, either choice posed a risk to the citizens of Laramie.

PAULOS VS. FCH1, LLC

2020 NV 2 · Nevada Supreme Court · Jan 30, 2020

Mahan concluded that Officer Baca was entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate a clearly established constitutional right. Paulos v. … Noting the two-prong showing for overcoming qualified immunity—that (1) the officers violated a constitutional right and (2) the right was clearly established—the Ninth Circuit used its