Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
5.76s
112 N.E.3d 302 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Sep 26, 2018
"[T]he relevant inquiry on summary judgment as to the defense of qualified immunity is whether a reasonable official could have believed his actions were lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information possessed … established religious rights. 13 Therefore, the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 2 timesPublished63 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 timesPublished708 F. Supp. 431 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 15, 1988
Thus, the court concludes that no constitutional counterpart of malicious prosecution or abuse of process was clearly established in 1983 and, therefore, the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on this … The Supreme Court has found that provisions in police regulations will not serve to clearly establish federal law for qualified immunity purposes. See Davis v.
Cited 3 timesPublishedOkin 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 timesPublished191 Vt. 412 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Apr 13, 2012
All were performed in good faith, i.e., they did not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known, and all were discretionary. Id. at 189-92 , 559 A.2d at 1081-83 . … The fate of an official with qualified immunity depends upon the circumstances and motivations of his actions, as established by the evidence at trial.” Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 , 419 n.13 (1976).
Cited 32 timesPublished290 F. Supp. 3d 371 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 2, 2018
Instead, the Court concludes that any procedural due process right is not (and was not at the relevant time) clearly established, meaning that the officers are entitled to qualified immunity in this case. A. … In any event, the real battle on the Brady count is qualified immunity: did police officers (as opposed to prosecutors) have clearly established Brady duties in 1993? In Gibson v.
Cited 64 timesPublishedJose 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 timesPublishedCallahan v. Lancaster-Lebanon Intermediate Unit 13
880 F. Supp. 319 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 5, 1994
immunity because no clearly established rights existed); Doe v. … established, and is not entitled to qualified immunity).
Cited 20 timesPublishedCourt 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 timesUnpublishedRonnie 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 timesUnpublishedBartlett 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 timesPublished527 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 timesPublishedFreedom 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 timesPublishedState 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 timesPublishedJohnnie 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 timesPublished984 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 timesPublishedHitoshi 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 timesPublished193 F. Supp. 3d 530 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Jun 16, 2016
Clearly Established Further, even if Hollandsworth used excessive force, she would still be entitled to qualified immunity because she did not violate a clearly established' constitutional right. … Clearly Established Law Alternatively, even if Gibson did use excessive force, he would still be entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate a clearly established constitutional right.
Cited 7 timesPublished310 F. Supp. 3d 581 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 19, 2018
In other words, he is entitled to qualified immunity if the constitutional right at issue was not clearly established. … In determining whether a constitutional right is clearly established or not for purposes of qualified immunity courts must consider whether "any reasonable official in the defendant's shoes would have understood that he was
Cited 53 timesPublished669 F.2d 542 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 13, 1982
The district court held that the Governor’s qualified immunity protected him from deposition absent a showing by plaintiffs of specific need.
Cited 59 timesPublished
Ask Donna