Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1791

10,000+ results

2.72s

  • Wood v. City of Alamogordo

    8 N.M. Ct. App. 43 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Feb 24, 2015

    Qualified Immunity, Clearly Established Law, and Trujillo 2 {7} We begin by addressing Wood’s argument that the district court erred in 3 concluding he failed to establish that Trujillo violated clearly established … New Mexico Board of Examiners of Optometry to argue 10 that Trujillo violated clearly established law and is therefore not entitled to qualified 11 immunity. 1979-NMSC-005, 92 N.M. 414, 589 P.2d 198.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Carradine v. State

    494 N.W.2d 77 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Dec 29, 1992

    legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.” … Carradine failed to show the search of his person was conducted with excessive force or violated any clearly established law.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Boyler v. City of Lackawanna

    287 F. Supp. 3d 308 · District Court, W.D. New York · Feb 27, 2018

    the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.' " McGowan v. … To this point, "[a]n officer is entitled to qualified immunity if he can establish that there was 'arguable probable cause' to arrest." Adebiyi v.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Tormasi v. Lanigan

    363 F. Supp. 3d 525 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 28, 2019

    could clearly establish a right for purposes of qualified immunity." *538 Mammaro v. … clearly established right to circumcision."

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Romer

    20 Brief Times Rptr. 1044 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Jun 27, 1996

    clearly established statutory or *90 constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … What is “clearly established law” is a question of law, and a court engaging in review of a qualified immunity determination should therefore use “its full knowledge of its own [and other relevant] precedents.”

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Tom Johnson v. Patrick McCarver

    942 F.3d 405 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 1, 2019

    was clearly established at the time of the incident. … McCarver and LaLuzerne violated Johnson’s clearly established right and qualified immunity does not apply.

    Cited 37 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
  • Hazley v. Roy

    378 F. Supp. 3d 751 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 26, 2019

    "Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, a court must dismiss a complaint against a government official in his [or her] individual capacity that fails to state a claim for violation of 'clearly established statutory or … C Once the right has been defined at the appropriate level of specificity, the next inquiry is whether that right was clearly established. Defendants challenge this component of qualified immunity, as well.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Jetta Elliott v. Dusty Morgan, in His Official Capacity as a Deputy Sheriff of Boone County

    603 S.W.3d 570 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 13, 2020

    Toward this end, police officers have qualified immunity from liability in their individual capacity unless they violate a clearly established right of which a reasonable person would know. Harlow v. … A motion for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity is precluded only when the plaintiff has asserted a constitutional violation, demonstrated that the constitutional right is clearly established

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Estate of Wayne Anderson v. John Marsh

    985 F.3d 726 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 15, 2021

    At oral argument, Marsh’s counsel conceded that the qualified immunity analysis turns on “[w]hether Officer Marsh reasonably perceived that [Anderson] was making a threatening movement,” and that it was “clearly established … MARSH conduct ‘did not violate the [Constitution] and, in any event, did not violate clearly established law.’”

    Cited 53 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
  • Phoenician Mediterranean Villa, LLC v. Swope (In Re J & S Properties, LLC)

    872 F.3d 138 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 28, 2017

    clearly established law. … “To overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must plead facts ‘showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was “clearly established” at the time of the challenged conduct

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • Johnnie Williams v. Lance Corporal Kyle Strickland

    917 F.3d 763 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Mar 5, 2019

    After discovery, Strickland and Heroux each moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for violations of constitutional rights that were not clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” Iko, 535 F.3d at 233.

    Cited 92 timesPublished
  • Vollette v. Watson

    937 F. Supp. 2d 706 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Apr 1, 2013

    However, the same qualified immunity test that requires this Court to ask “whether a given right was clearly established requires [the Court] to define that right ‘at a high level of particularity.’ ” Id. … immunity because the controlling law was not “clearly established.”

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • 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
  • T.A. VS. ERICK MELGAR (L-0466-12, HUNTERDON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

    New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 19, 2018

    Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (stating the doctrine of qualified immunity, protects government officials "from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … Thus, "a defendant cannot have qualified immunity if she was deliberately indifferent; a reasonable [prison official] could not believe that her actions comported with clearly established law

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Cozayatl Sampedro v. Schriro

    377 F. Supp. 3d 133 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Mar 28, 2019

    Sampedro cannot establish that he violated a clearly established right and, therefore, he is entitled to qualified immunity in any event. … similar circumstances. 4 See Allah, 876 F.3d at 59 (holding defendants were entitled to qualified immunity where relevant precedent *143 did not clearly establish that a substantive due process would result from disputed

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Melene James v. City of Boise

    160 Idaho 466 · Idaho Supreme Court · Mar 23, 2016

    The Court explained why the “clearly established law” could not be so general that it would eliminate the rale of qualified immunity. … With respect to qualified immunity, the court of appeals held that there was no clearly established law that the officer’s “use of a police dog to search and bite was unconstitutional.” Id. at 1092 .

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • McCoy v. City of Vallejo

    District Court, E.D. California · Jun 29, 2021

    See Mot. at 17–18. 1 Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability 2 for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate 3 clearly established statutory or constitutional … actions, 18 as clearly established law).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Richmond Lapolla v. County of Union

    449 N.J. Super. 288 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 28, 2017

    The qualified immunity doctrine is an affirmative defense that "shields government officials from a suit for civil damages when 'their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … And, as we observed, "[q]ualified immunity is applicable unless the official's conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right." Id. at 28 (alteration in original).

    Cited 43 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.