Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1878

10,000+ results

3.92s

  • King v. State

    242 Cal. App. 4th 245 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 18, 2015

    But Defendants are only entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law if, taking the facts in the light most favorable to [the Plaintiff], they violated no clearly established constitutional right. … The state and Tawney premise their 26 qualified immunity claim on an extremely narrow, factually detailed view of what the clearly established law would be in this case.

    Cited 29 timesPublished
  • Peoples v. Leon

    63 F.4th 132 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 20, 2023

    Peoples also argues that Alexander 8 and Leon are not entitled to qualified immunity because they violated his clearly established rights. … In evaluating a claim of qualified immunity, we must determine whether any constitutional right that the defendant violated “was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” Wilson v.

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • George Cooper, Sr. v. James Sheehan

    735 F.3d 153 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Nov 7, 2013

    Forsyth, seek to apply clearly established law to a given set of facts, we are properly vested with jurisdiction. See Johnson, 515 U.S. at 313. … As we have explained, “qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could

    Cited 360 timesPublished
  • Vu, Kojoua v. Lozano, Kevin

    District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Nov 27, 2023

    A government defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff shows not only that the defendant violated his rights, but also that his rights were “clearly established” at the relevant time. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (qualified immunity protects government officials from personal liability provided that “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Bartlett v. Cinemark USA, Inc.

    908 S.W.2d 229 · Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · Aug 11, 1995

    The doctrine of qualified immunity shields an official performing discretionary functions from liability for damages under section 1983 so long as the official’s conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional … Sullivan, 4 F.3d 2, 12 (1st Cir.1993) (recognizing that Supreme Court has not clearly explained role of “discretionary functions” in qualified immunity analysis).

    Cited 20 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
  • Randy McDaniel v. Markeith Neal

    44 F.4th 1085 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 15, 2022

    Even if his use of force was excessive, Neal is entitled to qualified immunity unless the excessiveness of the force was clearly established on the date of the incident, August 13, 2017. … The district court denied the officer’s motion for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity, and the en banc court reversed, holding that the officer did not violate a clearly established right on May 29, 2014.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Garces Robles v. Ramirez

    District Court, W.D. Texas · Jun 25, 2024

    Plaintiffs sufficiently plead that the individual Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. … Hicks, 81 F.4th at 504 (holding that the right to timely release was clearly established as of 2017).5 “Ultimately, the touchstone is fair warning: The law can be clearly established despite notable factual distinctions

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • 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
  • Santiago v. Leik

    179 Wis. 2d 786 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · Oct 28, 1993

    Thus, if at the time the challenged act occurred the law identifying the act as a constitutional violation was not clearly established, qualified immunity protects the official from suit. … The Barnhill court noted that confusion regarding qualified immunity "derives from the level of generality that should be afforded to 'clearly established law' at the time of the alleged unlawful act."

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Steven Kulkay v. Tom Roy

    847 F.3d 637 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 2, 2017

    But “[u]nless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” Mitchell v. … The officials are thus entitled to qualified immunity. Moreover, because Kulkay fails to state a claim of violation of clearly established law, he is not entitled to discovery before dismissal.

    Cited 297 timesPublished
  • Estate of Clemente N. Aguirre v. County of Riverside

    29 F.4th 624 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 24, 2022

    The Clearly Established Inquiry Because the Najeras have presented facts sufficient to establish a Fourth Amendment violation, we consider the second prong of qualified immunity: whether the law was clearly established … The posture of this interlocutory appeal coupled with clearly established law supports the district court’s denial of qualified immunity. IV.

    Cited 30 timesPublished
  • Janowski v. City of North Wildwood

    259 F. Supp. 3d 113 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 5, 2017

    “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects 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 … ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”).

    Cited 61 timesPublished
  • Patrick Dockery v. Sherrie Blackburn

    911 F.3d 458 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 19, 2018

    Qualified Immunity A public official is entitled to qualified immunity from suit unless he violated a clearly established constitutional right. Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731, 735 (2011). … Qualified-immunity analysis usually entails a two-step inquiry: we ask (1) whether the facts alleged or shown by the plaintiff establish a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) if so, whether that right was clearly

    Cited 190 timesPublished
  • Okin v. Village of Cornwall-On-Hudson Police Department

    577 F.3d 415 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 18, 2009

    established for purposes of qualified immunity. … That Dwares does not discuss the "shocks the conscience” standard, however, does not establish qualified immunity.

    Cited 348 timesPublished
  • Churchill v. University of Colorado at Boulder

    285 P.3d 986 · Supreme Court of Colorado · Sep 10, 2012

    Third, we hold that Churchill's bad faith investigation claim is barred by qualified immunity because the Regents' investigation into Churchill's academic record does not implicate a clearly established statutory or constitutional … . 1839 Qualified immunity applies to a public official's conduct when she takes a discretionary action that a reasonable person would not know violates a clearly established constitutional right of the plaintiff.

    Cited 50 timesPublished
  • Jose Elizondo v. City of Garland Police Dep

    671 F.3d 506 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 14, 2012

    West, 662 F.3d 320, 325 (5th Cir.2011), but the same does not hold for an order granting qualified immunity. An order granting immunity can be fully and fairly reviewed after a final judgment. See Thompson v. … To establish the use of excessive force in violation of the Constitution, a plaintiff must prove: “(1) injury, (2) which resulted directly and only from a use of force that was clearly excessive, and (3) the excessiveness

    Cited 70 timesPublished
  • Grohs v. Yatauro

    984 F. Supp. 2d 273 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 20, 2013

    The qualified immunity analysis Qualified immunity protects government officials such as Defendants Yatauro and Lanigan from liability for damages as long as their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or … Whether the Complaint alleges a constitutional violation that is clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity Grohs’ claim that inadequate hot water at the STU impaired the safety and well-being of its residents

    Cited 210 timesPublished
  • Woods v. Harris County

    Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 19, 2024

    We first address whether the district court correctly granted summary judgment in favor of the Deputy on the basis of qualified immunity. … Hudson, 933 F.3d 481, 486 (5th Cir. 2019) (“Because nonprecedential opinions do not establish any binding law for the circuit, they cannot be the source of clearly established law for qualified immunity analysis.”

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Ronnie Gibson, Sr. v. Nicholas Abate

    Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 11, 2025

    He claims that we should be wary of dismissing a case under Civil Rule 12(b)(6) based on the clearly established prong of qualified immunity. … There, we answered both questions raised by the officers’ qualified-immunity defense: Did the officers violate the Constitution? And did the caselaw clearly establish the violation when it occurred?

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished

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.