Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.56s
Patrick A. Dadd v. Anoka County
827 F.3d 749 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 30, 2016
Anoka also rests its claim for qualified immunity on the argument that Dadd’s right to treatment in this particular situation was not clearly established, the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis. … Even if a complaint fairly alleges a violation of a constitutional right, an official is nevertheless entitled to qualified immunity if that right was not clearly established at the time of the violation.
Cited 104 timesPublishedPaulette Smith v. Edward Agdeppa
81 F.4th 994 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 30, 2023
immunity analysis—whether the claimed unlawfulness of Agdeppa’s conduct was “clearly established … We are asked to decide whether this officer is entitled to qualified immunity. We hold that he is. The officer’s use of deadly force did not violate clearly established law.
Cited 20 timesPublished55 F.4th 167 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 28, 2022
immunity grounds, finding Clark failed to allege the violation of a clearly established right. … Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable
Cited 218 timesPublishedNeil Morgan v. Fairfield Cty., Ohio
903 F.3d 553 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 6, 2018
The district court was correct to conclude that the law was not clearly established, so that the claims against the individual officers failed on qualified immunity grounds. … Specifically, the court held, qualified immunity was appropriate because even if intruding onto the curtilage violated the Fourth Amendment, it was not clearly established that such an action was a violation at the time of
Cited 128 timesPublishedCassady v. Yellowstone County Montana Sheriff Department
333 Mont. 371 · Montana Supreme Court · Sep 6, 2006
We now turn to the issue of whether the Officers’ failure to knock and announce was reasonable for purposes of determining qualified immunity. ¶42 b) Was the knock and announce rule clearly established in the context of the … Instead, the Court remanded to consider whether the law was clearly established in a more ‘“particularized sense’” to answer the question of qualified immunity. Brosseau, 543 U.S. at 199 , 125 S.Ct. at 599 .
Cited 6 timesPublished301 Mich. App. 582 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 11, 2013
While this is a well-established principle, it is not absolute. In certain instances, Michigan criminal law clearly places the fact-finding function with the trial court judge. … To qualify for § 4 immunity, one must prove that he or she “(1) is a qualifying patient, (2) who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card, and (3) possesses less than 2.5 ounces of usable marijuana,” and
Cited 5 timesPublished314 P.3d 546 · Alaska Supreme Court · Dec 13, 2013
established’ . . . .”) … The officers’ conduct was reasonable and certainly does not violate clearly established law, unlike that of the officers in Headwaters Forest Defense v.
Cited 22 timesPublished222 F. Supp. 2d 809 · District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Jul 19, 2002
— was also clearly established. … The Court notes, under the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis, that the contours of this constitutional violation for qualified immunity purposes were clearly established at the relevant time.
Cited 8 timesPublishedJones v. American Alternative Insurance Corp
District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Mar 31, 2022
Nonetheless, the docttine of qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for claims against them in their individual capacities “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Dyer, 964 F.3d at 383-85 (citing pre-2020 cases for clearly established law). Thus, Plaintiffs have successfully overcome the Police Officer Defendants’ qualified immunity defense at the motion to dismiss stage.
Cited 0 timesUnknownPatsy Carolyn POE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donnie HAYDON, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants
853 F.2d 418 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 28, 1988
Poe contends that the burden is on the defendants to establish that they are entitled to qualified immunity; the plaintiff has no burden whatsoever of showing that the rights at issue were “clearly established” at the time … IV In rejecting the appellants’ claim to qualified immunity, the district court concluded that the appellants “may have violated the plaintiff's clearly established rights and hence are not qualifiedly immune.”
Cited 370 timesPublishedMichael Fenwick v. United States
778 F.3d 133 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 13, 2015
Under the circumstances of this case, we conclude that the deputies violated no clearly established law and are therefore entitled to qualified immunity. *135 I. … Fenwick’s clearly established constitutional rights.” Id. at 225. On appeal, the deputies challenge the district court’s denial of their motion for summary judgment, renewing their assertion of qualified immunity.
Cited 23 timesPublishedHancock v. Cnty. of Rensselaer
337 F. Supp. 3d 175 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 29, 2018
Individual Defendants' Claims to Qualified Immunity Government employees are entitled to qualified immunity from civil damages liability so long as they are performing discretionary functions and do not violate "clearly established … Because the constitutional rights upon which Plaintiffs rely were not clearly established at the time Defendants acted, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 3 timesPublished17 F. Supp. 3d 1227 · District Court, S.D. Florida · May 6, 2014
“Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” Behrens v. … On a motion to dismiss, “[t]o evaluate claims of qualified immunity, the Court considers whether (1) the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether the right was ‘clearly established’ at
Cited 1 timesPublishedKenneth Ratliff v. Aransas County, Texas
948 F.3d 281 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 15, 2020
He offered the testimony because of a failing memory and to rebut the deputies’ qualified immunity defense in this § 1983 case. … The second “asks whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.” Id. at 656.
Cited 156 timesPublished178 P.3d 459 · Alaska Supreme Court · Mar 14, 2008
Using the Saucier analysis, the superior court held that Jones and the City of Ambler were protected by qualified immunity because “[t]here was no clearly established law ... that would have given a reasonable officer notice … "If the law d[oes] not put the officer on notice that his conduct would be clearly unlawful, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is appropriate." Id. at 202, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . 12 .
Cited 11 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Aug 7, 2024
“When a defendant raises a qualified immunity defense, the court must dismiss the action unless the plaintiff shows that (1) the defendant violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the right was clearly established … support for the notion that the law is clearly established.”).6 Accordingly, Ms. Johnson’s Fourth Amendment claim against Ms. Shelton-Denley is barred by qualified immunity.7 B.
Cited 0 timesUnknown26 F.4th 270 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 11, 2022
“Once a defendant raises a qualified-immunity defense, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that (1) the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the right was ‘clearly established’ at the … Whatever one might think about qualified immunity, I think we’re duty bound to say the law is not clearly established when it takes a full-page flow chart to hold otherwise.
Cited 59 timesPublishedAndrea Miller v. Woodston Maddox
866 F.3d 386 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 3, 2017
Lastly, we address Maddox’s argument that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity for their actions unless (1) the plaintiff has established a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) the right at issue was clearly established at time of the incident
Cited 100 timesPublished836 F. Supp. 1219 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 2, 1993
Moreover, even if the asserted right is “clearly established,” the qualified immunity defense still protects the official if “he neither knew nor should have known of the relevant legal standard.” … Rights Clearly Established The First and Fifth Amendment rights to free speech, due process and equal protection certainly are clearly established.
Cited 10 timesPublishedCity of Dallas v. Half Price Books, Records, Magazines, Inc.
883 S.W.2d 374 · Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · Aug 18, 1994
If a police officer is immune from tort liability under the qualified immunity doctrine, the city is also immune. City of Houston v. Newsom, 858 S.W.2d 14, 19 (Tex.App. … My actions were consistent with State law and departmental regulations, and I did not violate clearly established law of which a reasonable person would have known.
Cited 48 timesPublished
Ask Donna