Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1951

10,000+ results

3.68s

  • Tuchman v. State

    89 Conn. App. 745 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Jun 24, 2005

    The plaintiffs claim that the court improperly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to entertain the action on the basis of the doctrines of sovereign immunity, qualified immunity and statutory immunity. … “Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

    Cited 23 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
  • Lucas v. The City of Reynoldsburg

    District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 2, 2025

    because they violated no clearly established right. … Thus, an official sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff shows that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was “clearly established” at the time of the

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Krupien v. Ritcey

    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 timesPublished
  • Lee Rice, II v. Dale Morehouse

    989 F.3d 1112 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 8, 2021

    CLEARLY ESTABLISHED LAW The district court held that even if Morehouse and Shaffer used excessive force, they were entitled to qualified immunity. … MOREHOUSE denying the officer qualified immunity, we said that the “right to be free of excessive force was clearly established” at the time of Emmons’s arrest in 2013. Emmons v. City of Escondido, 716 F.

    Cited 93 timesPublished
  • Pasco Ex Rel. Pasco v. Knoblauch

    566 F.3d 572 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 28, 2009

    The district court denied summary judgment based on its findings that Knoblauch had waived his qualified immunity defense by failing to raise it in a timely fashion, and that Knoblauch violated clearly established Fourth … facts amount to a violation of clearly established law.”

    Cited 124 timesPublished
  • Martin v. Haas

    556 S.W.3d 509 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 11, 2018

    That case is clearly not on point. … elections in this State are legally qualified to vote in such elections" modifies the requirement of "establish[ing] a system of permanent personal registration."

    Cited 29 timesPublished
  • Jennifer L. Burbridge v. Marcus Biggins

    2 F.4th 774 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 25, 2021

    “Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known … Alternatively, Appellants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established in this circuit whether the intracorporate conspiracy doctrine applied to bar § 1983 conspiracy claims.

    Cited 35 timesPublished
  • Forney v. Purvis

    190 Ga. App. 192 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jan 13, 1989

    “[T]he appealable issue [on a claim for qualified immunity] is a purely legal one: whether the facts alleged (by the' plaintiff, or, in some cases, the defendant) support a claim of violation of clearly established law.” … If, as plaintiff alleges, defendants denied her equal protection of the law because of her union membership, then their conduct was violative of clearly established law and would not be protected by qualified immunity from

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Jeremy Boudoin v. Terral Harsson

    962 F.3d 1034 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 22, 2020

    “Qualified immunity protects a government official from liability in a [§] 1983 action, unless the official’s conduct violates clearly established constitutional or statutory law of which a reasonable person would have known … In denying Harsson qualified immunity, the district court cited Nance v.

    Cited 43 timesPublished
  • WRIGHT CROFT v. DONEGAL TOWNSHIP

    District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 25, 2021

    Accordingly, government officials sued in their individual capacity are entitled to qualified immunity for alleged violations of a plaintiff’s civil rights “‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … In addressing a claim of qualified immunity, courts analyze “(1) whether the facts alleged by the plaintiff show the violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether the right was clearly established at the time of

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Breault v. Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners

    401 Mass. 26 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 13, 1987

    established.” … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 641 (1987) (principle of qualified immunity allows defendant to seek summary judgment on ground that, on “clearly established principles [of law],” he could have reasonably believed his acts to be

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Haywood v. Alexander

    121 So. 3d 972 · Supreme Court of Alabama · Feb 22, 2013

    ‘An official is entitled to qualified immunity if he is performing discretionary functions and his actions do “ ‘not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Jenkins’s ‘complaint allege[s] the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.’ Ex parte Alabama Department of Youth Services, 880 So.2d at 402 .

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • People v. Mazur

    497 Mich. 302 · Michigan Supreme Court · Jun 11, 2015

    Section 4 of the MMMA concerns immunity. A qualifying patient who receives a registry identification card is entitled to immunity, provided that certain conditions are met. MCL 333.26424(a). … The trial court’s contrary finding that “there is no evidence that she provided [marihuana paraphernalia] to a registered qualifying patient or registered caregiver” is clearly erroneous because elsewhere in its opinion the

    Cited 62 timesPublished
  • Archuleta v. LaCuesta

    128 N.M. 13 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Jul 2, 1999

    Such a person is entitled to qualified immunity from suit, however, if his or her action was objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law. See Yount v. … reasonably believed that the action was lawful in light of clearly established constitutional principles, see Anderson v.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Robert Reese, Jr. v. County of Sacramento

    888 F.3d 1030 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 23, 2018

    Rose’s entitlement to qualified immunity therefore turns on whether Reese’s right was clearly established at the time of the incident in 2011. … Ct. at 310 (quotation marks omitted).1 Absent a showing by Reese that the right was clearly established at the time, Rose is entitled to qualified immunity on the Fourth Amendment excessive force claim.

    Cited 374 timesPublished
  • Shelly Ioane v. Jean Noll

    903 F.3d 929 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 10, 2018

    Clearly Established The second part of the qualified immunity test requires us to determine whether, at the time of Agent Noll’s actions in June 2006, the law was clearly established. … But the existence of a constitutional violation alone is insufficient to deny qualified immunity—we must find that the right at issue was “clearly established.”

    Cited 81 timesPublished
  • Felicia Dean v. Stephen McKinney

    976 F.3d 407 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Oct 2, 2020

    The doctrine of qualified immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity—controversial, contested, and binding—is a familiar rule. 1 The doctrine shields the officer from suit unless his conduct violated “clearly established … But in doing so, the Court recognized that there was no clearly established law at the time of the crash in 2014 and granted qualified immunity. Id.

    Cited 66 timesPublished
  • SINGH v. UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

    District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 2, 2023

    Finally, the individual capacity claims fail on qualified immunity grounds because the Individual Defendants did not violate a clearly established constitutional right. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (“Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.”)

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • J.P. v. D.P.

    260 So. 3d 862 · Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · Mar 30, 2018

    App. 2008) ("Although these incidents were somewhat remote in time, they still evidence the character of the paternal grandmother and clearly and convincingly prove that she was not fit and qualified to receive and care for … App. 2012) (" ' "We should not equate the filing of 'court papers' and the taking of legal positions with the establishment of human relationships." ' [ Ex parte J.W.B. , 933 So.2d 1081 , 1092 (Ala. 2005) ](quoting K.W.J.

    Cited 0 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.