Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.96s
Williams v. Deputy Warden McKay
District Court, D. Idaho · Mar 31, 2022
Because determining clearly- established law is also the foundation for a qualified immunity defense, the Court includes qualified immunity considerations in its analysis. 3 Unless the parties can show otherwise … Luna, 577 U.S. 7, 12 (2015): The dispositive question [for qualified immunity] is “whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.” Ibid.
Cited 0 timesUnknownRuben 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 timesPublished811 F.2d 1240 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 27, 1987
Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526-27 , 105 S.Ct. 2806, 2815-16 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985), established the rule that denial of a qualified immunity defense, like the denial of absolute immunity, is immediately appealable as a final … clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”
Cited 21 timesPublishedSean Rambert, Sr. v. City of Greenville
107 F.4th 388 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 12, 2024
But an officer is not entitled to “qualified immunity if he or she deprived an individual of a constitutional right and that right was clearly established at the time of the violation.” … But that is not how the clearly established prong of qualified immunity works. Qualified immunity protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.”
Cited 25 timesPublished962 F.3d 1270 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 23, 2020
(2) The three officers were not entitled to summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds because “it is . . . clearly established by Tenth Circuit precedent that [Mr.] … Although they describe the law of qualified immunity, including the clearly established law requirement, see Aplt.
Cited 168 timesPublished154 F.3d 269 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 21, 1998
infringed was “clearly established];.]” 516 U.S. at 312-313 , 116 S.Ct. 834 (citations omitted). … Next, even if a public official’s conduct has violated a clearly established constitutional right, the official is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity if his or her conduct was objectively reasonable. Id.
Cited 37 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 timesPublishedBarbara Wyatt v. Rhonda Fletcher
718 F.3d 496 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 31, 2013
This requirement establishes a high bar. When there is no controlling authority specifically prohibiting a defendant’s conduct, the law is not clearly established for the purposes of defeating qualified immunity. … Because this is a qualified immunity case, a balancing of interests requires a clearly established right.
Cited 95 timesPublishedDavid Andrews v. Robert Scuilli
853 F.3d 690 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 10, 2017
If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity. … This leaves us with the question of whether the rights at issue were clearly established at the time.18 We need not dwell on this.
Cited 107 timesPublishedWoodyard v. Alabama Department of Corrections
700 F. App'x 927 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 30, 2017
rights and (2) that those rights were “clearly established” at the time of the violation. … Because Woodyard must establish a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Leggett violated his constitutional rights before he can possibly overcome the officer’s qualified immunity defense, we address the district
Cited 15 timesUnpublishedThe Estate of Donald Nash v. Henry Folsom
92 F.4th 746 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 9, 2024
The court then held that the right was clearly established and proceeded to deny the officers qualified immunity on Count I. … Clearly Established “Qualified immunity shields public officials from liability for civil damages if their conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person
Cited 20 timesPublished337 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
Cited 5 timesPublished652 So. 2d 1203 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 29, 1995
Qualified immunity affords government officials performing discretionary functions protection from liability under section 1983 where their conduct does not violate what reasonable people would recognize as a clearly established … Harlow 's "clearly established" standard demands that a bright line be crossed.
Cited 13 timesPublishedRobert Tolan v. Jeffrey Cotton
713 F.3d 299 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 26, 2013
“The second prong of the qualified immunity test is [] understood as two separate inquiries: whether the allegedly violated constitutional rights were clearly established at the time of the incident; and, if so, … clearly- established law.
Reversed on other grounds by Tolan v. Cotton, 134 S. Ct. 1861 (2014)Cited 17 timesPublishedLorraine 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 timesPublished400 N.W.2d 350 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Feb 10, 1987
This appeal is from an order denying summary judgment and rejecting appellants’ qualified immunity defense. … clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.
Cited 5 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 timesUnknown165 Vt. 515 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Oct 18, 1996
They also argued that their actions were protected by qualified immunity. … Based on an objective standard, defendants did not violate any clearly established rights of plaintiff.
Cited 41 timesPublished168 F. Supp. 3d 1265 · District Court, S.D. California · Mar 2, 2016
Qualified Immunity The Supreme Court recently summarized the doctrine of qualified immunity. … conduct is clearly established.”
Cited 3 timesPublished185 A.3d 1026 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 1, 2018
As described by the United States Supreme Court: The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Pearson’s description of qualified immunity as providing immunity from suit, rather than a mere defense to liability, describes this situation.
Cited 12 timesPublished
Ask Donna