Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
4.92s
Douglas W. Schwenk v. James Hartford Steve Sinclair Robert Mitchell,opinion
204 F.3d 1187 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 29, 2000
This satisfies the first part of the “analytical framework” for determining qualified immunity established in Siegert . … Was the Law Clearly Established?
Cited 398 timesPublished639 F.3d 471 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 8, 2011
Nevertheless, the court granted Glandon qualified immunity, finding that the law did not clearly establish “at the time of this incident that an officer was required to leave a private home in the middle of a child neglect … “[Qualified immunity protects government officials 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
Cited 22 timesPublished115 Conn. App. 603 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Jul 14, 2009
The defendants argue that Carini and Castronova are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate a clearly established constitutional right. … “When [a motion for summary judgment] is based on assertion of qualified immunity, the first issue is whether a clearly established right is at stake. ...
Cited 7 timesPublished3 F. Supp. 3d 526 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Feb 28, 2014
Goo-den filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and officers invoked qualified immunity. The district court initially denied qualified immunity as did a divided panel of the Fourth Circuit. Id. … a claim of violation of clearly established law.”
Cited 3 timesPublished740 F. Supp. 2d 385 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 19, 2010
Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity “when they perform discretionary functions if either (1) their conduct did not violate clearly-established rights of which a reasonable person would have known, or ( … If the right is not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation, then government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity. See Safford Unified School District v.
Cited 461 timesPublishedLynette Christmas v. Harris County, Georgia
51 F.4th 1348 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 28, 2022
DISCUSSION “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for govern- ment officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … If, however, the official vio- lated the law[,] but his conduct was not clearly established as un- lawful, the court must grant him qualified immunity.
Cited 89 timesPublished14 F. Supp. 3d 842 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 9, 2014
’s Fourth Amendment rights, the court turns directly to the second analytical step of the qualified immunity analysis: whether that right was clearly established when the actions at issue occurred. … January 26, 2010), plaintiffs acknowledge that [f]or the purposes of the qualified immunity analysis, “ ‘clearly established’ means that the ‘contours of the right’ are ‘sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would
Cited 21 timesPublishedRalph Harrison Benning v. Commissioner, Georgia Department of Corrections
71 F.4th 1324 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 23, 2023
The Supreme Court re- cently summarized this aspect of the qualified immunity inquiry: Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s con- duct does not violate clearly established statutory … Thus, because the law was not clearly established, we affirm the district court’s ruling that Ms. Edgar and Ms. Patterson are en- titled to qualified immunity on Mr.
Cited 26 timesPublishedMelissa Hearring v. Karen Sliwowski
712 F.3d 275 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 27, 2013
clearly established.” … Dragovic, 576 F.3d 539, 544 (6th Cir. 2009) (addressing the clearly established prong first in the qualified-immunity analysis).
Cited 64 timesPublished142 F. Supp. 2d 416 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 24, 2001
Even if the applicable law was clearly established when the purported violation occurred, officials may still successfully assert qualified immunity if they can show that their actions were “objectively reasonable.” … Summary judgment on the basis of a claim of qualified immunity is therefore only appropriate if the court finds that the asserted rights were not clearly established, or if the evidence is such that, even when it is viewed
Cited 15 timesPublished844 F.2d 714 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 7, 1988
to qualified immunity. … If the law was not clearly established at the time defendants acted, they are entitled to qualified immunity. Id.; Mitchell, 472 U.S. at 524 , 105 S.Ct. at 2814 .
Cited 43 timesPublished119 Ohio App. 3d 424 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 24, 1997
First, with regard to immunity for a federal claim, in order to defeat a defendant’s motion for summary judgment under a qualified immunity defense, a “plaintiff must: 1) identify a clearly established right alleged to have … Taken together, Hunter and Harlow stand for the proposition that, where the law has been clearly established, a mistaken decision made in extraordinary circumstances may not lead to loss of immunity.
Cited 66 timesPublished652 F. Supp. 2d 203 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Sep 9, 2009
On this claim, the officers have asserted the defense of qualified immunity, which “protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … immunity analysis, are more properly explored under the clearly established prong.
Cited 8 timesPublished877 F. Supp. 1055 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 7, 1995
General Electric Company, supra, make clear that the initial foundational requirement a proponent of expert scientific testimony must meet as a pre-requisite to admissibility is to establish that the witness is qualified … It was in Frye that the "general acceptance” requirement was first established. 4 .
Cited 26 timesPublishedKatrina McGrew v. Sergeant Duncan
937 F.3d 664 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 4, 2019
Qualified immunity shields the officers from suit if (1) they did not violate any of McGrew’s constitutional rights or (2) the violated rights, if any, were not “clearly established” when they acted. Pearson v. … So whether they are entitled to qualified immunity turns on whether McGrew suffered an injury and whether the right she claims they violated was clearly established when they acted.
Cited 37 timesPublished692 F. Supp. 1406 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 30, 1988
When the Harlow Court redefined the qualified immunity defense it provided an additional basis for defendant to retain his qualified immunity even if his actions violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Our inquiry does not end with the identification of a violation of a clearly established constitutional right and the stripping away of defendant’s qualified immunity.
Cited 1 timesPublished637 F.3d 675 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 25, 2011
Garner[, 471 U.S. 1 (1985),] provides a ‘clearly established’ right that fulfills the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis.” Id. at 347. … Thus, Pierce is entitled to qualified immunity.” Id. at 878.
Cited 41 timesPublished50 S.W.3d 599 · Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo) · Jun 7, 2001
overcome their entitlement to qualified immunity. … ’s qualified immunity on May’s substantive due process claims.
Cited 42 timesPublishedMichael Hampton v. State of California
83 F.4th 754 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 3, 2023
“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 person would have known.’” … To be clearly established, the relevant right must have been defined more narrowly.
Cited 62 timesPublished124 F.4th 1073 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 7, 2025
An official will be protected by qualified immunity “un- less the plaintiff shows: ‘(1) that the official violated a statu- tory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was “clearly established” at the time of the … It was not clearly established that Lieutenant Lee’s use of deadly force was unreasonable, and, accordingly, he is entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 19 timesPublished
Ask Donna