Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1861

10,000+ results

9.15s

  • 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
  • Garcia v. Las Vegas Medical Center

    112 N.M. 441 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Apr 30, 1991

    One issue is qualified immunity. A public official is not liable for damages under Section 1983 unless the right violated by the official was clearly established at the time of the violation. … Although Ex parte Romero may be persuasive precedent, it cannot be said to make the federal law clearly established so as to overcome qualified immunity if decisions in other jurisdictions are to the contrary.

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • Atkinson v. Pustilnik

    District Court, S.D. Texas · May 2, 2024

    established, meaning qualified immunity was warranted) … Violation of a Clearly Established Right The second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry requires me to determine if the “right at issue was clearly established at the time of the defendant

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Garcia v. Royal Bank of Canada

    178 F. Supp. 2d 74 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Dec 17, 2001

    Qualified Immunity Noriega contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … If no violation of a clearly established constitutional right is found, then the analysis halts because “there is qualified immunity.” Aponte Matos v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Murphy v. City of Farmington

    District Court, D. New Mexico · May 12, 2021

    to qualified immunity. … The officers are entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Daniel Chavez v. David Robinson

    817 F.3d 1162 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 29, 2016

    In this case, the panel determined that plaintiff’s complaint did not clearly show that he would be unable to overcome qualified immunity. … ROBINSON Chavez’s pro se complaint did not clearly show that he would be unable to overcome qualified immunity.

    Cited 131 timesPublished
  • Outlaw v. Nasworthy

    250 Ga. App. 362 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jul 3, 2001

    by reference to clearly established law. … On a motion for summary judgment, if the applicable law was clearly established at the time the defendant acted, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Guerra v. Castillo

    82 F.4th 278 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 7, 2023

    cause is clearly established. … When evaluating whether Castillo violated clearly established law for purposes of our qualified immunity analysis, we consider whether the law was clearly established “at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct

    Cited 63 timesPublished
  • Dejuan Hopson v. Jacob Alexander

    71 F.4th 692 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 16, 2023

    Washington therefore does not qualify as clearly established law for purposes of the qualified immunity inquiry in this case. Hopson next points to our decision in Espinosa. See 598 F.3d at 537–39. … Notably, Robinson itself granted qualified immunity to the officers because the constitutional right that had been violated was not clearly established at the time. 278 F.3d at 1015–16.

    Cited 39 timesPublished
  • Coliseum Enterprises, Inc. v. Campbell

    173 Vt. 585 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Feb 25, 2002

    qualified immunity. … To overcome the commissioners’ qualified immunity defense, therefore, plaintiffs must identify a “clearly established” right that was violated by the rescission of their application.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • William Thorpe v. Harold Clarke

    37 F.4th 926 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 14, 2022

    On qualified immunity, it reasoned that “when this suit was filed in May 2019, caselaw had clearly established that the Eighth Amendment prohibited prison officials from depriving inmates of ‘the basic human … They suggest we apply qualified immunity to just that prong, hold that it was not clearly established by 2012 that long-term isolation violated the Eighth Amendment, and dismiss the case before ever reaching

    Cited 95 timesPublished
  • Bell v. City of Albany

    210 Ga. App. 371 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Sep 23, 1993

    clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … App. 798 ( 432 SE2d 593 ) (1993). 4 Qualified immunity is a question of law for the court. Stone v.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Salas v. United States

    District Court, D. New Mexico · Feb 28, 2024

    United States, 571 U.S. 591 (2015), the Tenth Circuit vacated Salas’ § 924(c) conviction on the ground that arson was not a qualifying “crime of violence” and remanded for resentencing. … Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 390 (2000) (“It is past question that the rule set forth in Strickland qualifies as ‘clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Brown v. Scott

    329 F. Supp. 2d 905 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Jul 26, 2004

    The defendant claims that he is entitled to a dismissal on the basis of qualified immunity because the undisputed facts do not demonstrate a violation of the plaintiffs clearly established Eighth Amendment rights. … further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.”).

    Cited 70 timesPublished
  • Rouse v. Plantier

    997 F. Supp. 575 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 9, 1998

    The level of generality at which the right asserted must be “clearly established” is the key conceptual issue in many qualified immunity cases, and has been clearly articulated by Plaintiffs, see Plaintiffs’ Letter-Brief … right to adequate medical care was “clearly established.”

    Vacated on other grounds by a later decision, 182 F.3d 192 (1999)Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Teresa Graham v. Shannon Barnette

    5 F.4th 872 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 16, 2021

    She also argues that probable cause was the clearly established standard at the time, meaning the officers are not entitled to qualified immunity as to this claim. … The officers also argued that they were entitled to qualified immunity as to this claim because their seizure of Graham did not violate clearly established law.

    Cited 49 timesPublished
  • Walker v. Ryals

    District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jul 28, 2023

    Because the above failure to protect law was clearly established prior to the May 2022 fight, I conclude Officer Huett and Corporal Barnat are not entitled to qualified immunity on this failure to protect claim. … And, because that law was clearly established before May 2022, I conclude Defendant Barnat is not entitled to qualified immunity on this excessive force claim. V.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Petcu v. State

    121 Wash. App. 36 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 30, 2004

    Finally, he argued that Smith was not entitled to qualified immunity because she violated Petcu’s clearly established right to family unity. … Once a defendant asserts a defense of qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show that a clearly established constitutional right exists. Robinson, 119 Wn.2d at 65-66 .

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • B.R. v. West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources, Bureau for Children and Families, and Child Protective Services

    Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia · Feb 8, 2024

    is necessary to defeat the defense of qualified immunity. … Code § 49-6A-9, which would overcome qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • State Ex Rel Juvenile Department v. Tucker

    76 Or. App. 673 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 4, 1985

    The state does not argue persuasively that the experts did possess special knowledge of Indian life, but it contends that they were nevertheless qualified, because they had the necessary expertise to establish beyond a reasonable … However, when cultural bias is clearly not implicated, the necessary proof may be provided by expert witnesses who do not possess special knowledge of Indian life.

    Cited 50 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.