Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.01s
Bronche Johnson v. California Department of Corrections
384 F. App'x 625 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 17, 2010
The district court properly entered summary judgment on Johnson’s claims under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”) based on qualified immunity because the pertinent law was not clearly established … Callahan, 129 S.Ct. 808, 822 (2009) (holding that state officers were entitled to qualified immunity because their actions did not violate clearly established law); see also Warsoldier v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedIngram v. Township of Deptford
858 F. Supp. 2d 386 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 13, 2012
deprivation violated clearly established law. … was clearly established.
Cited 15 timesPublishedEric 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 timesUnpublishedDistrict Court, D. Idaho · Dec 20, 2023
violated clearly established law at the time of the incident. … Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability unless a plaintiff proves: “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time
Cited 0 timesUnknownAndrew B. Bloom v. Melissa Peacock
498 F. App'x 867 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 19, 2012
Further, a defense of qualified immunity may be addressed in a motion to dismiss, which will be granted if the “complaint fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.” St. George v. … To determine if an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, courts must determine (i) whether the plaintiff’s allegations establish a constitutional violation, and (ii) whether the constitutional violation was clearly
Cited 16 timesUnpublishedCourt of Appeals of Iowa · May 13, 2026
established at the time of the alleged violation.” … established at the time of the alleged violation.”
Cited 0 timesPublishedRuben Sebastian v. Javier Ortiz
918 F.3d 1301 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 14, 2019
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 person would have … Now to the “clearly established” question. A plaintiff can show the violation of a clearly established right in a few ways. See Vinyard, 311 F.3d at 1350–52.
Cited 139 timesPublishedDaniels 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 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 12, 2024
“To show that the official violated a ‘clearly established’ right, the plaintiff must ‘define with specificity the clearly established legal rule that the officers allegedly violated.’” Paul v. Whitley Cnty. Det. … In response to Defendant’s claim to qualified immunity, Plaintiff cites no case law that would tend to show Dunaway violated Plaintiff’s clearly established right to not be handcuffed like he was.
Cited 0 timesUnknownIan 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 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 4, 2009
ASHCROFT lates the Constitution, we should still grant him qualified immunity because that constitutional right was not “clearly established” in March 2003, when al-Kidd was arrested. We disagree. … Ohio, was certainly clearly established.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDouglas Echols v. Spencer Lawton
913 F.3d 1313 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 25, 2019
The district court also ruled that Lawton enjoys qualified immunity because Echols's complaint failed to allege the violation of a right that was clearly established when Lawton sent his letter. *1319 II. … To defeat Lawton's qualified immunity, Echols must also prove that Lawton violated a constitutional right that "was 'clearly established' at the time of the challenged conduct." Plumhoff v.
Cited 120 timesPublished335 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 timesPublished844 F. Supp. 391 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Feb 17, 1994
The appropriate standard is taken to be whether disputes clearly exist with regard to material facts on which the qualified immunity defense is based or whether, on the undisputed facts, qualified immunity is clearly unjustified … In such a case, granting summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds is clearly inappropriate.
Vacated in part by Dickerson v. McClellan, 37 F.3d 251 (1994)Cited 5 timesPublishedDesiree Martinez v. Channon High
91 F.4th 1022 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 26, 2024
The panel nevertheless held that Officer High was entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established in 2013 that Officer High’s conduct violated Martinez’s substantive due process rights. … based on the lack of any clearly established law.
Cited 26 timesPublishedLucas 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
Cited 3 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 7, 2023
Taylor to overcome the mayor’s qualified immunity by showing (1) that the mayor violated a statutory or constitutional right and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct … What matters here is not how this issue would be resolved on the merits but only that the law was not clearly established—so the mayor has qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished349 F. Supp. 3d 377 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Nov 21, 2018
Qualified immunity generally protects government officials when performing discretionary functions, *383 such as arrests, "from liability for civil damages" if "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity is a question of law, asking whether the right at issue was "clearly established in a more particularized, and hence more relevant, sense: The contours of the right must
Cited 1 timesPublishedGeronimo Lozano v. State of New Jersey
9 F.4th 239 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 16, 2021
A police officer is entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless the plaintiff shows that the officer violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Rather, we may only “review whether the set of facts identified by the district court is sufficient to establish a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.” Id.
Cited 54 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 timesPublished
Ask Donna