Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2006

10,000+ results

1.46s

  • Crone v. Connelly

    74 Conn. App. 788 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Feb 4, 2003

    “The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability if the official’s conduct did not violate constitutional rights that were clearly established at the pertinent time or if it was objectively … As a general rule, police officers are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe their acts did

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Kipp v. Saetre

    454 N.W.2d 639 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · May 1, 1990

    THE IMMUNITY OP APPELLANT COUNTY PROSECUTOR The absolute immunity of prosecutors was established by the United States Supreme Court in Imbler v. … of his qualified immunity.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Ringuette v. City of Fall River

    906 F. Supp. 55 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 9, 1995

    “Qualified immunity shields state officials exercising discretionary authority from civil damages ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … has no qualified immunity from suit, presents a question of law... .

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Chana Wiley v. City of Columbus

    36 F.4th 661 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 2, 2022

    The qualified immunity question turns on “(1) whether the officer violated the plaintiff’s constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment; and (2) whether that constitutional right was clearly established at the time of … “When federal qualified immunity and Ohio state-law immunity under Ohio Rev.

    Cited 32 timesPublished
  • Galloway v. Hadl

    548 F. Supp. 2d 1215 · District Court, D. Kansas · Apr 28, 2008

    If plaintiffs allegations sufficiently allege the deprivation of a clearly established constitutional right, qualified immunity will not protect defendants. I. … Because plaintiff has not alleged a clearly established violation of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Hadl, Hofer and Riggs are entitled to qualified immunity on that claim. B.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Raymond Barton v. Sheldon Neeley

    114 F.4th 581 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 27, 2024

    If the public-official defendant did not violate a constitutional right, or if he did but the right was not clearly established at the time of the violation, then the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. … Therefore, the court denied qualified immunity because it was “clearly established that the First Amendment protect[s] a citizen’s decision both as to what to say and No. 23-2089 Barton v.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Wilson v. Jean

    145 F. Supp. 3d 434 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 30, 2015

    The Supreme Court teaches qualified immunity protects Defendant Officers from liability “when their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established ... constitutional rights’ a reasonable official, similarly situated, .would … on video and admitted by him is not clearly established.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Ingram v. Cooper

    163 F. Supp. 3d 1133 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Feb 18, 2016

    and the law supporting plaintiffs claims was. not clearly established. … For the purpose of qualified immunity, it is clearly established that discrimination against a person because of his or her race would be a clearly established violation of the person’s constitutional *1140 rights.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Padilla v. Mason

    169 S.W.3d 493 · Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) · Jul 28, 2005

    of qualified immunity and official immunity. … Because there was no clearly established rule which would prohibit Mason from using the force that he did, he is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Turner v. Perry

    278 S.W.3d 806 · Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Feb 26, 2009

    Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects governmental officials performing discretionary functions frpm suit if their actions were objectively reasonable in the light of then clearly-established law. Anderson v. … Appellants contend that they nevertheless are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate a clearly established right protecting Perry’s speech.

    Cited 35 timesPublished
  • 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
  • Victor Smith v. City of Troy, Ohio

    874 F.3d 938 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 1, 2017

    A public official is entitled to qualified immunity and, thus, is shielded from suit under § 1983 if his conduct does not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable official would … Osting is not entitled to qualified immunity for this use of force.

    Cited 131 timesPublished
  • Foreman v. PA BECKWITH

    260 F. Supp. 2d 500 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Apr 10, 2003

    For the defendants to avail themselves of the protection of qualified immunity, we must determine “if their actions were objectively reasonable, as evaluated in the context of the legal rules that were clearly established … We move now to the second inquiry of qualified immunity analysis to see if the right the defendants are alleged to have violated was clearly established. A.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Norvis Harmon v. Dallas County, Texas

    927 F.3d 884 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 21, 2019

    Next, he argues the district court erred in granting Evans qualified immunity on his First Amendment retaliation claim because his right to engage in the speech at issue was clearly established at the time of his termination … After ordering supplemental briefing on this point, the district court held that the law regarding Harmon’s speech was not clearly established at the time of his termination and thus Evans was entitled to qualified immunity

    Cited 40 timesPublished
  • Odhuno v. Reed's Cove Health & Rehab., LLC

    355 F. Supp. 3d 1026 · District Court, D. Kansas · Dec 14, 2018

    Thus, Mallen does not support a clearly established constitutional right that defeats Rose and Sunderraj's claims of qualified immunity. … The Court next examines the second prong of qualified immunity-whether the law was clearly established.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Williams v. Belknap

    154 F. Supp. 2d 1069 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Jul 24, 2001

    If the Court were to decide that the right allegedly violated was not clearly established, the doctrine of qualified immunity would shield the defendant from suit. … The Court’s conclusion that the right was clearly established, conversely, would mean that qualified immunity is no obstacle to a continuation of the suit.

    Cited 97 timesPublished
  • SOL v. City of Miami

    776 F. Supp. 2d 1375 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 11, 2011

    The City submits that the contribution claim against Estevez is barred by qualified immunity unless Fritzler can demonstrate Estevez violated a clearly-established constitutional or statutory right. … He claims he already pled everything necessary to overcome qualified immunity: i.e., that Estevez did, in fact, violate maritime navigation rules, and that those navigation rules were clearly established.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Burns v. Citarella

    443 F. Supp. 2d 464 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 18, 2006

    Qualified Immunity: Merits The doctrine of qualified immunity shields “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Nevertheless, “Even where the plaintiffs federal rights and the scope of the official’s permissible conduct are clearly established, the qualified immunity defense protects a government actor if it was ‘objectively reasonable

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Gurno v. Town of LaConner

    65 Wash. App. 218 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 20, 1992

    Qualified Immunity Respondent officers cite various doctrines of qualified immunity for police officers who act in good faith, arguing that appellant failed to introduce evidence of their lack of good faith in arresting her … Qualified immunity under § 1983 is granted to police officers performing discretionary functions insofar as their conduct "does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Sueiro Vázquez v. Torregrosa De La Rosa

    414 F. Supp. 2d 124 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Feb 10, 2006

    established requirement of the qualified immunity defense.” … Moreover, the Court has also established that qualified immunity is immaterial to injunctive relief. Hegarty v. Somerset County, 25 F.3d 17 n. 2 (1st Cir.1994).

    Cited 1 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.