Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
3.09s
Barbara Donald v. Tyler Norris
131 F.4th 1255 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 13, 2025
We need address only whether Burrell’s right to some other treatment was clearly established because that answer resolves the qualified-immunity question. … Indeed, the formulation from the Hill dicta would eliminate the “clearly established” part of the qualified-immunity analysis as we know it.
Cited 16 timesPublished21 F.3d 597 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 28, 1994
Qualified immunity protects a police officer from liability if a reasonable competent law enforcement officer would not have known that his actions violated clearly established law. Anderson v. … The examination of a claim of qualified immunity is a two-step process. The first inquiry is whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional' right. Siegert v.
Cited 127 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · Dec 28, 2021
Plaintiff argues that Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. Plaintiff first asserts that his federal malicious prosecution and Brady violation claims were clearly established in 1999. … To overcome a qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must show that the official violated a constitutional right that was “clearly established at the time” of the official’s conduct. District of Columbia v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownShah v. University of Texas Southwestern Medical School
54 F. Supp. 3d 681 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Oct 20, 2014
Shah violated a clearly established right. … Shah violated one or more of Shah’s clearly established constitutional rights when he wrote to the SPC, Dr. Shah is entitled to qualified immunity. E The court now considers whether Dr.
Cited 18 timesPublishedPeople of Michigan v. Robert Elijah Anthony
Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 22, 2019
“A finding of fact is clearly erroneous if, after a review of the entire record, we are left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” … Defendant maintains that the more recent passage of the MMMA calls into question the Michigan Supreme Court’s prior holding in Kazmierczak, which allows the smell of marijuana alone to establish probable cause.
Cited 0 timesPublished944 P.2d 449 · Alaska Supreme Court · Aug 22, 1997
Under federal case law, 5 a law enforcement officer is entitled to qualified immunity when performing a search and seizure if, in light of clearly established law and the information available to the officer at the time, … This rule was “clearly established law” at the time Brown searched Van Sandt’s trailer.
Cited 16 timesPublished357 F. Supp. 3d 90 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 20, 2019
"Qualified immunity attaches when an official's conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known," City of Escondido, Cal. v. … "The 'clearly established' analysis has two sub-parts." Id.
Cited 2 timesPublishedReuben Garcia v. City of New Hope
984 F.3d 655 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 5, 2021
Thus, the officers are entitled to qualified immunity “unless: (1) [they] violated a constitutional right, and (2) that constitutional right was clearly established so that a reasonable officer would know of the right at … Because I conclude that Garcia has not shown a violation of a clearly established constitutional right, I would affirm the district court’s grant of qualified immunity on this claim.
Abrogated in part, on other grounds by Derek Laney v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, 56 F.4th 1153 (2023)Cited 27 timesPublished303 Ga. App. 91 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Mar 24, 2010
(a) Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from individual claims if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … clearly established law.
Cited 13 timesPublishedDel A. v. Edwin Edwards, Individually and as Governor of the State of Louisiana
855 F.2d 1148 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 28, 1988
The district court denied the motion, holding that because the alleged illegal actions violated clearly established statutory and federal constitutional rights, qualified immunity was not available. … Id. *1151 Thus, the concept of “clearly established” had to be defined narrowly to serve the goals of qualified immunity.
Cited 21 timesPublishedDavid N. OSOLINSKI, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lt. KANE, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants
92 F.3d 934 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 12, 1996
immunity, typically, the issue whether the federal right allegedly infringed was ‘clearly established’.” … “Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity only ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Allen v.
Cited 219 timesPublishedOmar Ex Rel. Cannon v. Lindsey
243 F. Supp. 2d 1339 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 14, 2003
Qualified Immunity Defendants, all of whom are being sued in them individual capacities, raise the defense of qualified immunity. … Last spring, the Supreme Court handed down a decision that clarifies how a court is to determine whether a particular right was “clearly established” for the purposes of a qualified immunity analysis. In Hope v.
Cited 7 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 24, 2022
Defendants then contend they are entitled to qualified immunity on each of the claims. … Similarly, Deputy Sikes is not entitled to qualified immunity. Pace v.
Cited 0 timesUnknown588 So. 2d 1154 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 3, 1992
Economou, 438 U.S. 478 , 98 S.Ct. 2894 , 57 L.Ed.2d 895 (1978). [4] However, we need not decide whether absolute immunity applies to the present factual situation since we find that the doctrine of qualified immunity is clearly … Considering the above cited principles, we now review the pleadings in this matter to determine whether the plaintiff has set forth material facts establishing that the defendants violated a clearly established right of which
Cited 20 timesPublished38 F.4th 1282 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 11, 2022
The district court nonetheless held that Officer Yehia was entitled to qualified immunity because Mr. Irizarry had not shown a violation of clearly established law. … Irizarry has shown a violation of clearly established law. Officer Yehia is not entitled to qualified immunity. III.
Cited 61 timesPublishedFinlan v. Dallas Independent School District
90 S.W.3d 395 · Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland) · Nov 27, 2002
The defense of qualified immunity shields governmental officials from liability under Section 1983 for civil damages if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … It did not address the first inquiry in the qualified immunity analysis; that is, it did not address the question of law whether the law was clearly established in 1992 that the filing of a civil suit, alleged to be malicious
Cited 35 timesPublished872 F. Supp. 746 · District Court, D. Hawaii · Dec 27, 1994
Qualified Immunity Plaintiff enjoys a clearly established right against arrest without probable cause. See Floyd v. Laws, 929 F.2d 1390, 1394 (9th Cir.1991) (right is clearly established). … the qualified immunity standard requires more than the firm establishment of a generalized right.
Cited 14 timesPublished73 F.4th 1007 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 21, 2023
Assuming without deciding that decisions of the Eighth Circuit may constitute clearly established law for qualified-immunity purposes, cf. City of -4- Escondido v. … Thus, Martin failed to show that clearly established law prohibited Deputy Turner’s conduct, and Deputy Turner is entitled to qualified immunity. III.
Cited 7 timesPublished2016 Ohio 8553 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 29, 2016
City of Olmsted Falls, 395 F.3d 291, 302 (6th Cir.2005). {¶13} Once qualified immunity is raised, it is the plaintiff's burden of proof to establish that the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. … Thus, we need not consider whether Williams is protected by qualified immunity.
Cited 1 timesPublished665 F. Supp. 964 · District Court, D. Maine · Jul 17, 1987
The court held that Anderson did not enjoy qualified immunity, because “the Creightons’ fourth amendment rights and the ‘exigent circumstances’ doctrine were ‘clearly established’ on [the date of the search].” … Thus, to win summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity, defendants must establish either that the law establishing the right allegedly violated was not clearly established, or that, in light of the facts and circumstances
Cited 4 timesPublished
Ask Donna