Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1958

10,000+ results

2.01s

  • Quinn v. Webster County, Mississippi

    District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Mar 30, 2023

    Clifton, 29 F.3d 1012 (5th Cir. 1994) (holding that law enforcement officers are entitled to qualified immunity “unless it is shown that, at the time of the incident, [the officer] violated a clearly established constitutional … While his contention is clearly that it occurred prior to entering the cell, the allegation provides no further context as to when it happened.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Smiley

    District Court, S.D. Georgia · Mar 12, 2026

    But the arguable probable cause inquiry in a false arrest case is no different from the clearly established law inquiry in any other qualified immunity case … Clearly Established Law To prevail against the assertion of qualified immunity, Plaintiff must show—in addition to a constitutional violation— that “when the

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • TC Reiner v. Canale

    301 F. Supp. 3d 727 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 15, 2018

    Beyond failing to cite any authority suggesting-let alone clearly establishing-that Defendant's use of the Work was not fair use, Plaintiff has all but conceded that his rights were not clearly established for qualified-immunity … As Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that *744 any infringement of any right of his was clearly established, Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiff's DMCA claim as well. 2.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Point Properties, Inc. v. Anderson

    584 So. 2d 1332 · Supreme Court of Alabama · Jun 14, 1991

    Fitzgerald , 457 U.S. 800 , 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), established the following test for determining whether a public official can claim qualified immunity: '[G]overnment officials . . . generally … . * If the law that the defendants allegedly violated was not clearly established, then the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. See Daniel v.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Eason v. Thaler

    14 F.3d 8 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 10, 1994

    Cited 409 timesPublished
  • City of Phoenix v. Yarnell

    184 Ariz. 310 · Arizona Supreme Court · Dec 14, 1995

    Without ever reaching the issue of the detectives’ immunity, the court concluded that the detectives did not violate Smith’s clearly established constitutional rights. … What the County missed is that the City escaped liability not because of the detectives' qualified immunity but because there was no clearly established constitutional right that was violated. .

    Cited 29 timesPublished
  • Spruytte v. Owens

    190 Mich. App. 127 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 20, 1991

    Regarding the immunity question, it is clear that Rule 791.6637(4) was a clearly established state regulation, violation of which is sufficient to cause officials to forfeit their qualified immunity. … Because the officials violated that rule and the rule was clearly established at the time of the violation, the officials are not entitled to immunity.

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Shaw v. Williams

    District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 7, 2018

    When a defendant invokes qualified immunity, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show two things: (1) that the defendant violated a statutory or constitutional right; and (2) that the right was “clearly established” at … Ct. at 552 (a plaintiff cannot defeat qualified immunity by defining clearly established law “at a high level of generality”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Sawyers v. Norton

    962 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 timesPublished
  • James P. Crocker v. Deputy Sheriff Steven Eric Beatty

    886 F.3d 1132 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 2, 2018

    Rights may be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes by one of three methods: (1) “case law with indistinguishable facts clearly establishing the constitutional right,” (2) “a broad statement of principle within … We further determine that these rights were clearly established at the time of the seizure such that Beatty is not entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 106 timesPublished
  • McIntire v. State

    458 N.W.2d 714 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Aug 7, 1990

    . § 1983 , the trial court correctly determined that agency's executive director, personnel director, and supervisor had a qualified immunity from liability for conduct which did not violate clearly established constitutional … To penetrate the government officials' qualified immunity, the balance must be in favor of the employee to a degree that evidences a clearly established right.

    Cited 36 timesPublished
  • Sean 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 timesPublished
  • Emmons v. City of Escondido

    168 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 timesPublished
  • Douglas v. Galloway

    568 F. Supp. 966 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jul 25, 1983

    The Governor bases his immunity claim on two different doctrines: the qualified immunity accorded state executive officials in § 1983 cases, as enunciated in Harlow v. … If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Rangel v. Lorum

    District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Oct 23, 2019

    Haessig, 788 F.3d 662, 667 (7th Cir. 2015) (affirming denial of qualified immunity for supervisor of parole agent who failed to respond to complaints by plaintiff parolee that agent was sexually harassing him). … Hartford, 204 F.3d 1187, 1197 (9th Cir. 2000) (“In the simplest and most absolute of terms, the Eighth Amendment right of prisoners to be free from sexual abuse was unquestionably clearly established prior to the time of

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • The 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 timesPublished
  • Tellier v. Fields

    280 F.3d 69 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 1, 2000

    of clearly established rights. … Horne supports the need to address the constitutional question when a court finds that qualified immunity does not exist because the right asserted is clearly established.

    Cited 106 timesPublished
  • Young v. Scales

    873 A.2d 337 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 21, 2005

    that a defendant had qualified immunity. … Thus, to overcome qualified immunity, the right allegedly violated “must have been ‘clearly established’ in a more particularized, and hence more relevant, sense: The contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Parmelee v. Schnader

    2018 Ohio 707 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 22, 2018

    Brooks, 436 U.S. 149, 155, 98 S.Ct. 1729, 56 L.Ed.2d 185 (1978). {¶22} A governmental official sued under 42 U.S.C. §1983 may assert the defense of qualified immunity when their conduct “does not violate clearly established … Once the defendant raises the defense of qualified immunity, it is the plaintiff's burden to establish that the defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity. Id. citing Silberstein v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Goetz v. Noble

    652 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 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.