Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1810

10,000+ results

2.42s

  • Lang v. City of Nacogdoches

    942 S.W.2d 752 · Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler) · Mar 27, 1997

    In suits alleging illegal arrest, the qualified immunity determination turns on whether a reasonable officer could have believed the arrest to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the officer … the legal rules that were “clearly established” at the time it was taken. *767 Anderson v.

    Cited 42 timesPublished
  • Kimberlin v. Quinlan

    199 F.3d 496 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 28, 1999

    The judgment on the clearly established law, however, is not fully dispositive of the issues raised by appellants’ renewed motion for summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity. … was clearly established.”

    Cited 64 timesPublished
  • Moody v. Michigan Gaming Control Board

    202 F. Supp. 3d 756 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Aug 15, 2016

    Therefore, because a reasonable officer would have believed his actions to be lawful, the rights at issue were not clearly established. Accordingly, the Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on these claims. C. … Finally, the Defendants argue that they are still entitled to qualified immunity because any violation did not involve a clearly established right that a reasonable person would have known. Dkt. No. 144 at 30-31 (Pg.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Byrd v. Haas

    District Court, E.D. Michigan · Nov 23, 2020

    Qualified Immunity for RLUIPA Claims Qualified immunity is unavailable for the RLUIPA claims in this case. … And qualified immunity only applies to claims for money damages, not claims for injunctive or declaratory relief. See Flagner v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Romero v. Bexar County

    993 F. Supp. 2d 658 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Jan 9, 2014

    Government officials performing discretionary functions are protected from civil liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity if their conduct violates no “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Qualified immunity is not only a defense to liability but also a immunity from suit. Pearson, 555 U.S. at 223 , 129 S.Ct. 808 .

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Cunningham v. Gates

    229 F.3d 1271 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 31, 2000

    In order to decide the qualified immunity claims, we must determine 1) whether non-shooting officers are entitled to qualified immunity because “jamming” does not violate clearly established law, 2) whether council members … are entitled to qualified immunity because a policy of indemnifying officers against punitive damages does not violate clearly established law, and 3) whether City attorneys are entitled to qualified immunity because recommending

    Cited 434 timesPublished
  • Kapinski v. City of Albuquerque

    964 F.3d 900 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 6, 2020

    In response, Detective Juarez moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity, arguing that omitting the video footage did not transgress any clearly established law. … clearly established.”

    Cited 49 timesPublished
  • Christopher Stoner v. Eugene Watlingten

    735 F.3d 799 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 7, 2013

    Qualified Immunity 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 … Under these principles, we frame the clearly-established question as whether a reasonable officer would have known that he violated clearly established Fourth Amendment law by arresting Stoner for violating Ark.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Zwalesky v. Manistee County

    749 F. Supp. 815 · District Court, W.D. Michigan · Aug 16, 1990

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY All of the individual defendants that had contact with the decedent on the day of his death assert that they are immune from suit in the present action due to the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Although qualified immunity is somewhat akin to an affirmative defense, the defendant does not bear the burden of establishing that his alleged conduct did not violate clearly established law. Dominque v.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Estate of Joseph Valverde v. Dodge

    967 F.3d 1049 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 30, 2020

    On this issue we rely on the second prong of qualified immunity, the absence of clearly established law to support Plaintiff’s claim. … Prong Two - Clearly Established Law Whether the district court properly denied qualified immunity to Sergeant Dodge turns on whether the Estate has shown that his challenged conduct violated clearly established law

    Cited 54 timesPublished
  • Hlubek v. Pelecky

    701 N.W.2d 93 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jul 22, 2005

    We quoted a Supreme Court case regarding qualified immunity and the philosophy underlying it: “[T]he qualified immunity defense ‘shield[s] [government agents] from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does … not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known....’

    Cited 67 timesPublished
  • Aboufariss v. City of De Kalb

    305 Ill. App. 3d 1054 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 7, 1999

    To determine whether qualified immunity applies to a defendant in section 1983 actions, courts examine whether the defendant’s conduct violated plaintiff’s constitutional rights and whether the rights were clearly established … Once the defendant raises the defense of qualified immunity, the plaintiff carries the burden of demonstrating the violation of a clearly established right. Forman, 104 F.3d at 957-58 .

    Cited 48 timesPublished
  • Joseph C. Avakoff, Appellant-Applicant v. Southern Pacific Company and Southern Pacific Transportation Company, Appellees-Opposers

    765 F.2d 1097 · Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · Jun 19, 1985

    Without more, this type of shipment is clearly not activity amounting to a sale or transportation of the goods in commerce and does not constitute a bona fide shipment sufficient to lay a foundation for federal registration … Clearly, the shipment by applicant’s manufacturer to the applicant was not use of the mark by applicant in commerce. Conclusion The order of the board granting Southern Pacific’s motion for summary judgment is affirmed.

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • Monica Lee, Individually and On Behalf of The Estate of Damien Cameron, and All of the Heirs at Law and Wrongful Death Beneficiaries of Damien Cameron v. Rankin County, Mississippi, Hunter Thomas Elward and Luke Aaron Stickman

    Court of Appeals of Mississippi · May 5, 2026

    Qualified Immunity ¶25. … Thus, plaintiffs bear the burden to rebut a defense of qualified immunity “by establishing that the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law.” Harris v. Miss.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • IN RE: DISCIPLINE OF CHRISTOPHER R. ARABIA

    495 P.3d 1103 · Nevada Supreme Court · Sep 23, 2021

    immunity and the State Bar lacked jurisdiction over him.2 Qualified immunity does not apply to attorney disciplinary proceedings Arabia contends that he cannot be professionally disciplined because his actions … are entitled to protection under the qualified immunity doctrine, and thus, this matter must be dismissed.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Tucker v. Resha

    648 So. 2d 1187 · Supreme Court of Florida · Nov 10, 1994

    Her petition relied in large measure on the established federal appellate mechanism for interlocutory review of orders denying summary judgment on the issue of qualified immunity. [2] The district court determined that there … Under the qualified immunity doctrine, "government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

    Declined to follow by Department of Educ. v. Roe, 679 So. 2d 756 (1996)Cited 64 timesPublished
  • Venisee v. Miami-Dade County

    District Court, S.D. Florida · May 28, 2025

    To qualify as clearly established, a legal principle “must be established with obvious clarity by the case law so that every objectively reasonable government official facing the circumstances would know that the official … was clearly established well before the night of the shooting in 2012.”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Anne Powers v. John T. Lightner, D/B/A Lightner Auto Sales, Third-Party v. Barry Jones and Bruce White, Third-Party

    752 F.2d 1251 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 16, 1985

    Accordingly, the Court dropped the subjective component and announced that qualified immunity is to be judged by a simple objective standard: whether the acts of the official violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional … But when clearly established rights are involved, qualified immunity does not protect against trial: [W]e see no substantial basis for holding ... that executive officers generally may with impunity discharge their duties

    Disagreed with in part by Lojuk v. Johnson, 770 F.2d 619 (1985)Cited 8 timesPublished
  • White v. Taylor

    677 F. Supp. 882 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Jan 13, 1988

    ground of qualified immunity. … qualified immunity.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Paugh v. Uintah County

    47 F.4th 1139 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 7, 2022

    Qualified Immunity 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 … The Law is Clearly Established The district court held that the law was clearly established.

    Cited 72 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.