Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1921

10,000+ results

5.14s

  • Smith v. Lomax

    45 F.3d 402 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 22, 1995

    Then we ask, on the issue of qualified immunity, whether precedent clearly established that such conduct violated the Equal Protection Clause. … her of a clearly established property right.

    Cited 199 timesPublished
  • Hydrick v. McDaniel

    500 F.3d 978 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 30, 2007

    Thus, there are two bodies of law from which we might draw “clearly established” law for qualified immunity purposes: first, where the SVPs claim a violation of a right that is clearly established even in the prison context … b)(6) based on qualified immunity. 3.

    Overruled on other grounds by Hydrick v. Hunter, 669 F.3d 937 (2012)Cited 147 timesPublished
  • David B. Klein v. Paul Long, Blackman Township Police Officer Phillip Rogers, Blackman Township Police Sergeant

    275 F.3d 544 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 21, 2001

    Qualified Immunity In civil suits for money damages, government officials acting in their official capacity are entitled to qualified immunity for discretionary acts that do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … We need not reach, then, the second part of the qualified immunity analysis delineated in Saucier — whether the constitutional right violated was clearly established.

    Cited 160 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
  • Williams v. Austen

    District Court, N.D. California · Sep 16, 2021

    Dkt. 20 at 13-15. 10 The defense of qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil 11 damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Courts may consider these two questions in either order, and a favorable determination for 15 the defendant on either establishes qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • Turpin v. Ray

    319 F. Supp. 3d 191 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 12, 2018

    "clearly established" under the circumstances. … Callahan , Officers Rowley and Strange may still claim qualified immunity as long as the alleged violation was not clearly established at the time. Brown v. Fogle , 819 F.Supp.2d 23 , 28-29 (D.D.C. 2011).

    Cited 13 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
  • Collins v. Ainsworth

    382 F.3d 529 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 20, 2004

    Clearly established Fourth Amendment law. … Clearly established Fourteenth Amendment law.

    Cited 92 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • Smith v. Peyman

    93 F. Supp. 3d 738 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Mar 18, 2015

    clearly established constitutional law. … The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was “clearly established” at the time of the violation. Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 739 , 122 S.Ct. 2508 , 153 L.Ed.2d 666 (2002).

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Sawyer v. County of Creek

    908 F.2d 663 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 18, 1990

    Ramirez argues that Leona Sawyer has pled insufficient facts to overcome Ramirez’s absolute and qualified immunity from suit. 1 We turn first to Ramirez’s claim of qualified immunity. … Unlike other affirmative defenses, qualified immunity is not merely a defense to liability; it is also an immunity from suit.

    Overruled on other grounds by Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit, 507 U.S. 163 (1993)Cited 60 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.