Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1924

10,000+ results

3.32s

  • 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
  • Hurdsman v. Commander Pokluda

    District Court, W.D. Texas · Jan 13, 2020

    Qualified Immunity “A qualified immunity defense alters the usual summary judgment burden of proof.” Brown v. Callahan, 623 F.3d 249, 253 (5th Cir. 2010). … Guendry, 703 F.3d 757, 763-64 (5th Cir. 2012) (qualified immunity will not protect officers who apply excessive force merely because their means of apply it are novel; further, Graham excessive force factors “can ‘clearly

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Adam Saetrum v. Jake Vogt

    673 F. App'x 688 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 20, 2016

    Cases from this and other circuits clearly established that using a car as an impact weapon constituted at least a significant, intermediate level of force. See Young v. … The Takedown Claim With respect to the takedown claim, by contrast, Vogt’s actions did not violate clearly established law.

    Cited 3 timesUnpublished
  • Tracy Ray Vaughan v. James D. Ricketts

    859 F.2d 736 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 14, 1988

    Ricketts moved for summary judgment, claiming a qualified immunity from suit because the law governing body cavity searches of inmates was not clearly established as of March 1984. … Finally, the district court found that clearly established standards existed under the eighth and fourteenth amendments as well. The court thus refused to grant Ricketts qualified immunity on any of Vaughan’s claims.

    Overruled on other grounds by Mark Koch v. James G. Ricketts, 68 F.3d 1191 (1995)Cited 72 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
  • 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
  • West Virginia Department of Education v. McGraw

    239 W. Va. 192 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 17, 2017

    , qualified immunity bars recovery for Ms. … The DOE argues that qualified immunity bars this claim for two reasons: (1) the facts alleged in the complaint do not outline a liberty interest violation (or any other clearly-established constitutional or statutory violation

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Bearman v. California Medical Board

    176 Cal. App. 4th 1588 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 26, 2009

    In determining whether supervisor has qualified immunity, we “undertake a two-step analysis: ‘(1) Was the law governing the official’s conduct clearly established? … To avoid the qualified immunity defense, appellant must show that supervisor’s conduct “violate[d] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. [Citations.]”

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • G.M. ex rel. B.M. v. Casalduc

    982 F. Supp. 2d 1235 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Nov 4, 2013

    When a defendant asserts qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) the constitutional right was clearly established … with police assistance is not clearly established).

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Slade v. Vernon

    110 N.C. App. 422 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 1, 1993

    The sole question upon review is whether the trial court erred in denying defendants’ summary judgment motion based upon public officers’ immunity, governmental immunity and qualified immunity. … In general, qualified immunity protects public officials from personal liability for performing discretionary functions insofar as their conduct does not violate “ ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of

    Cited 66 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
  • Tate v. Alexander

    527 F. Supp. 796 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Nov 30, 1981

    Some controversy has developed over the years concerning exactly how one can tell that a particular constitutional right has become “clearly established” for purposes of applying qualified immunity for official actions, and … was therefore not clearly established.

    Modified by Melvin Alexander, on Behalf of Himself and Others Similarly Situated v. Lamar Alexander, Governor, 706 F.2d 751 (1983)Cited 8 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
  • Long v. Underwood

    District Court, N.D. Alabama · Dec 4, 2019

    Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from suit “in their individual capacities unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Univ., 102 F.3d 1179, 1182 (11th Cir. 1997) (stating that the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on a motion to dismiss if the complaint “fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Brosseau v. Haugen

    543 U.S. 194 · Supreme Court of the United States · Dec 13, 2004

    not entitled to qualified immunity. … We grant the petition on the second, qualified immunity question and reverse.

    Reported overruled in part, on other grounds by Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) — not on the Supreme Court's listCited 2,461 timesPublished
  • West Virginia Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation v. Billie Taylor

    West Virginia Supreme Court · May 2, 2023

    Furthermore, the circuit court found questions of fact existed about qualified immunity, namely whether DOCR violated clearly established rights of the respondent about which a reasonable person would have known, or acted … When weighing the evidence regarding qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage, a court is guided by the following standard: The ultimate determination of whether qualified or statutory immunity bars

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Hitoshi Yoshikawa v. Troy Seguirant

    41 F.4th 1109 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 25, 2022

    Because there is a circuit split, he claims that there is no clearly established law, and he is entitled to qualified immunity. We are not persuaded by this argument. … Simply put, invoking McDonnell Douglas at this stage created unnecessary confusion over the clearly established law test for qualified immunity.

    Cited 20 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
  • DE MONTALVO v. DIXON

    District Court, N.D. Florida · Oct 17, 2024

    FDC Defendants also assert qualified immunity. ECF No. 32 at 24-25. III. … proceed to the next step of determining if a constitutional right was clearly established”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

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.