Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1831

10,000+ results

7.27s

  • Clayborne v. Brown

    District Court, C.D. Illinois · Mar 20, 2023

    violation; and (2) the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … But where the law was clearly established, both qualified immunity questions must be addressed. Id.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Estate of Madison Jody Jensen v. Clyde

    989 F.3d 848 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 2, 2021

    right was clearly established at the time in question. … Jensen’s rights, those rights were not clearly established.

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Nowak v. Szwedo

    704 F. Supp. 153 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 11, 1989

    qualified immunity. … Defendants claim that qualified immunity relieves them of liability because at the time of their alleged actions there was no established case law upholding a First Amendment claim for retaliation as petty and far removed

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • United States v. Rivera

    658 F.3d 1073 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 23, 2011

    qualifies as a predi- cate offense. … “Our purpose is to determine whether documentation or judicially noticeable facts clearly establish that the defendant pleaded guilty to facts covered by the predicate offense.” Id. at 968.

    Abrogated on other grounds by Roberto Lopez Valencia v. Loretta E. Lynch, 798 F.3d 863 (2015)Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Amore v. Novarro

    624 F.3d 522 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 22, 2010

    Government officials are entitled to 2 qualified immunity "insofar as their conduct does not violate 3 clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a 4 reasonable person would have known." … Ct. at 813 ("We now hold that the Saucier procedure should not be regarded as an inflexible requirement and that petitioners are entitled to qualified immunity on the ground that it was not clearly established

    Cited 154 timesPublished
  • Andrews v. Crump

    144 N.C. App. 68 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 5, 2001

    They may, however, raise the defense of qualified immunity to section 1983 claims. Id. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • Shoemaker v. Smith

    353 Md. 143 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 10, 1999

    'abstract issu[e] of law’ relating to qualified immunity ... … —typically, the issue whether the federal right allegedly infringed was 'clearly established. ..

    Cited 107 timesPublished
  • Vette v. Sanders

    989 F.3d 1154 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 5, 2021

    Vette’s clearly established rights under the Fourth Amendment.6 It accordingly held Sergeant Sanders was not entitled to qualified immunity. Sergeant Sanders timely appealed. Although Mr. … Legal Standards and Standard of Review “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

    Cited 119 timesPublished
  • Henes v. Morrissey

    194 Wis. 2d 338 · Wisconsin Supreme Court · Jun 27, 1995

    The relevant inquiry in a qualified immunity case is: [ W]hether a reasonable state official could have believed his or her act was constitutional "in light of clearly established law and the information [he or she] possessed … The standard of objective legal reasonableness used in determining qualified immunity requires the court to focus on the degree to which clearly established case law gives guidance to officials *347 faced with a particular

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Scott v. Britton

    16 S.W.3d 173 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Apr 13, 2000

    The doctrine of qualified immunity shields an official performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages under section 1983, provided the official’s conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional … After a governmental official asserts the affirmative defense of qualified immunity, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that the defendant’s conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

    Cited 52 timesPublished
  • Attocknie Ex Rel. M.P. v. Smith

    798 F.3d 1252 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 24, 2015

    Cherry’s entry of Aaron’s home was clearly contrary to well-established law. He is not entitled to qualified immunity on the claim of unlawful entry. … It then summarizes his view of the law of qualified immunity but concludes that “[t]he second stage of qualified immunity analysis, whether a right was ‘clearly established’ need not even be performed, as Defendant Smith

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Henke v. Superior Court

    161 Ariz. 96 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · May 10, 1989

    under the defendant’s version of the facts the defendant’s conduct violated clearly established law, whether the law clearly proscribed the actions the defendant claims he took. 472 U.S. at 528 , 105 S.Ct. at 2816 , 86 L.Ed … of qualified immunity.

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Primus

    District Court, D. South Carolina · Feb 17, 2026

    Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant in her individual capacity is further barred by qualified immunity as Plaintiff has not stated a constitutional violation. Harlow v. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982) (noting that qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from civil damage suits as long as the conduct in question does not “violate clearly

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • James Rieves v. Town of Smyrna, Tenn.

    Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 15, 2020

    Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil suits for damages, so long as their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … On a general level, “[i]t is clearly established that an arrest without probable cause violates the Fourth Amendment.” Crockett v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Johnson v. Morris

    453 N.W.2d 31 · Supreme Court of Minnesota · Mar 23, 1990

    Qualified immunity is available if the officer did “not violate clearly established stat *39 utory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Simply stated, if the law the officer allegedly violated was “clearly established” there would exist no immunity, but, if not, qualified immunity would be available. Harlow, 457 U.S. at 819 , 102 S.Ct. at 2738-39 .

    Cited 113 timesPublished
  • Lubcke v. Boise City/Ada County Housing Authority

    124 Idaho 450 · Idaho Supreme Court · Sep 9, 1993

    Under Harlow , Worrell is entitled to qualified immunity only if she did not violate clearly established constitutional law. … Thus, Worrell should be immune from suit *465 if: a) it was not clearly established law in 1986 that a public employee may not be terminated for her exercise of her First Amendment rights, and b) it was not clearly established

    Cited 50 timesPublished
  • Jackie L. Brown, II v. City of Montgomery

    233 W. Va. 119 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Feb 20, 2014

    Code, 29-12A-1, et seq., is entitled to qualified immunity from personal liability for official acts if the involved conduct did not violate clearly established laws of which a reasonable official would have known. … Code, 29-12A-1, et seq., is entitled to qualified immunity from personal liability for official acts if the involved conduct did not violate clearly established laws of which a reasonable

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Joshua Paul English v. Officer Jonathan Fowler

    75 F.4th 1151 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 27, 2023

    They argued that they are entitled to qualified immunity from the claim of ex- cessive force. … that violated clearly established law.”

    Cited 29 timesPublished
  • Perea v. Baca

    817 F.3d 1198 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 4, 2016

    Baca and Jaramillo timely appealed the denial of qualified immunity. … not violate clearly established law.

    Cited 143 timesPublished
  • Carter v. Beebe

    Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 22, 2026

    This argument may have merit on the first step of qualified immunity analysis—constitutional violation, but not the second—clearly established law. Mr. … that Chief Beebe violated clearly established constitutional law, Chief Beebe is entitled to qualified immunity on Mr.

    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.