Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
3.69s
621 F.3d 1196 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 14, 2010
On review of a denial of a motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity, we review de novo whether governing law was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. See Mabe v. … [3] A court, when deciding whether there has been a viola- tion of a “clearly established right” for qualified immunity, must strike the proper balance in defining that right. In Ander- son v.
Cited 150 timesPublished240 F. Supp. 3d 426 · District Court, D. South Carolina · Mar 8, 2017
Qualified Immunity Government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct.
Cited 17 timesPublishedPooler v. Hempstead Police Department
897 F. Supp. 2d 12 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 14, 2012
that preclude summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. 1. … Tollaksen, 257 Fed.Appx. 400, 401 (2d Cir.2007) (explaining that government officers “are protected by qualified immunity if their actions do not violate clearly established law, or it was objectively reasonable for them
Cited 12 timesPublishedCITADEL WELLWOOD URBAN RENEWAL LLC v. BOROUGH OF MERCHANTVILLE
District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 27, 2023
“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of … ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”
Cited 0 timesUnknown77 F. Supp. 3d 1154 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Dec 24, 2014
established prong of the qualified immunity analysis. … Clearly Established Rights in the Qualified Immunity Analysis.
Cited 71 timesPublishedBelinda Marie Fitzpatrick v. Kyle Hanney
138 F.4th 991 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 30, 2025
Qualified immunity shields government officials from suit unless those officials (1) violated a constitutional right that (2) was clearly established when the conduct occurred. Bell v. … Because the undisputed facts do not show that Simon plausibly violated Fitzpatrick’s clearly established rights, Simon is entitled to qualified immunity on Fitzpatrick’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims.
Cited 4 timesPublished672 F.3d 1126 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 9, 2012
We further hold that Heiman and Neil did not violate clearly established rights by arresting Conner. … HEIMAN 2757 clearly established, the Supreme Court has specified that the application of that requirement must be clearly established in a particularized context. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 202.
Cited 55 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 timesPublished107 F. Supp. 3d 69 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 2, 2015
Cir. 2015) (“To defeat a defense of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show not only that an official ‘violated a constitutional right’ but also that 'the right was clearly established' at the time of the violation.”) … 12 clearly established at the time,” Lash, 2015 U.S.
Cited 11 timesPublished285 Ga. App. 216 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · May 2, 2007
The Goldens appeal the trial court’s award of summary judgment to Vickery on the ground of qualified immunity. We find no error and affirm. … The qualified immunity doctrine The doctrine of official immunity, also known as qualified immunity, offers public officers and employees limited protection from suit in their personal capacity.
Cited 10 timesPublished335 F.3d 889 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 9, 2003
a complaining witness in presenting a judge with a supporting affidavit to establish probable cause for an arrest. … We must now recognize that beyond those functions historically recognized as absolutely immune at common law, qualified and only qualified immunity exists.
Overruled on other grounds by Sanchez v. Mayorkas, 593 U.S. 409 (2021)Cited 1,451 timesPublishedStudent Services for Lesbians/Gays & Friends v. Texas Tech University
635 F. Supp. 776 · District Court, N.D. Texas · May 28, 1986
Qualified Immunity For Defendants Not Given Absolute Immunity First, this defense of qualified immunity is asserted principally on behalf of those defendants who were sued in an individual capacity. … The Law as to the Plaintiff Organization Was Clearly Established In Some Circuits The defense of qualified immunity is not an absolute bar to damages against persons who are sued also in their individual capacity.
Cited 1 timesPublished951 S.W.2d 25 · Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Jul 10, 1997
claims of qualified immunity in section 1983 cases.” … Flores and Manning focus their arguments on the objective reasonableness of their actions to establish their entitlement to qualified immunity.
Cited 18 timesPublishedJacob Clark v. Bernadette Stone
998 F.3d 287 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 19, 2021
They also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on this issue because there is no clearly established right to use corporal punishment on children. … App’x 469, 481 (6th Cir. 2019) (“A single district court opinion is not enough to pronounce a right is clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity.”)
Cited 61 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · Aug 20, 2021
Supp. 3d 636, 664-65 (E.D.N.Y. 2017) (arresting officer not entitled to qualified immunity despite officer’s testimony he merely gave arrestee a “bear hug” in light of plaintiff’s testimony that he was placed in a chokehold … Ohio 2004) (stating that an officer who “flipped [plaintiff] to the ground and choked him two times, the second time while [plaintiff] was not resisting . . . violat[ed] . . . clearly established law”).
Cited 0 timesUnknown879 F. Supp. 2d 472 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 30, 2011
The Housleys bear the burden of proving the violation of a constitutional right, but the Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity if they prove that the right was not clearly established. See Wilson v. … Finally, the Court will not revisit the qualified immunity issue at trial.
Cited 13 timesPublishedDerek Westwater v. Kevin Church
60 F.4th 1124 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 23, 2023
Alternatively, the court ruled that Church was entitled to qualified immunity on the federal § 1983 claim because any constitutional violation was not clearly established. Westwater appeals. … In these circumstances, summary judgment should not be granted on either qualified immunity issue, whether the force used was reasonable and, if not, whether the violation was clearly established.
Cited 20 timesPublishedVan Lee Brewer v. Jason Simental
Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo) · Oct 15, 2010
defendants and, therefore, the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. … Those governmental officials are entitled to qualified immunity "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Id.
Cited 0 timesPublishedSteven J. KELLEY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert G. BORG, Defendant-Appellant
60 F.3d 664 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 28, 1995
Despite this erroneous statement in his order, however, the magistrate judge ultimately conducted the proper inquiry for a qualified immunity examination: He ruled that the right allegedly violated was clearly established … Appellants argue that they should have been granted qualified immunity because the second, “clearly established,” prong of the test has not been met.
Cited 107 timesPublishedWayne Thomas Ahlers and Nina Ahlers v. Ronald J. Schebil
188 F.3d 365 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 30, 1999
Qualified Immunity Next, Plaintiffs contend on appeal that, regardless of this panel’s conclusions as to whether Wayne Ahlers’s arrest was supported by probable cause, Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity because … There are really two separate inquiries here: whether the Washtenaw County Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity and whether Parsons is entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 409 timesPublished
Ask Donna