Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1861

10,000+ results

6.13s

  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • Golodner v. Berliner

    770 F.3d 196 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 27, 2014

    the clearly established law.” … Few issues related to qualified immunity have caused more ink to be spilled than whether a particular right has been clearly established, mainly because courts must calibrate, on a case- by-case basis, how generally or

    Cited 68 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
  • Miller v. IDAHO STATE PATROL

    150 Idaho 856 · Idaho Supreme Court · May 18, 2011

    If a government official violates the claimant’s constitutional rights, qualified immunity “generally turns on the objective reasonableness of the action assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established … qualified-immunity inquiry instead.

    Cited 35 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
  • Carswell v. Camp

    54 F.4th 307 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 30, 2022

    But Carswell says this was “the opposite of a refusal or failure to rule” because the “district court clearly indicated it would timely address Individual Defendants’ qualified immunity defense.” … No. 21-10171 established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.”

    Cited 138 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
  • Jonathan Jacobson v. James McCormick

    763 F.3d 914 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 14, 2014

    In his supplemental briefing, Jacobson conceded that we “must address” the issue of qualified immunity, but argued the officers are not entitled to immunity because it was clearly established that strip searches were permissible … McCormick and Voltaire are entitled to qualified immunity from suit unless the facts taken in the light most favorable to Jacobson establish that the officers violated a constitutional right, and that the right was clearly

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Estate of Aaron Bruce Cadman v. Dennis, et al.

    2018 DNH 018 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Jan 29, 2018

    Police officers “are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’” … (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). 5 The court focuses on the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis because it is dispositive of the excessive force claim. See Pearson v.

    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.