Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

10,000+ results

1.23s

  • Cristo v. Evangelidis

    90 Mass. App. Ct. 585 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Oct 28, 2016

    [Q]ualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability for money damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory authority or constitutional … the defendant's position would understand that his conduct violated those clearly established rights.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • CITADEL 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 timesUnknown
  • Gary Mason v. Ricky Stallings, C.L. St. Clair, Jr., Charles Burkhalter, Harold Woodall, Phillip Jordan, All Individually

    82 F.3d 1007 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 9, 1996

    Judicially created qualified immunity enables a public official to avoid suit on an alleged constitutional or federal law violation where the law governing the claimed right was not clearly established at the time of the … The relevant question on a motion for summary judgment based on a defense of qualified immunity is whether a reasonable official could have believed his or her actions were lawful in light of clearly established law and the

    Cited 178 timesPublished
  • Belinda 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 timesPublished
  • Young v. District of Columbia

    107 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 timesPublished
  • Hills v. Comwlth of KY

    457 F.3d 583 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 9, 2006

    The district court’s denial of qualified immunity in this case was based on the conclusion that “[u]nder the clearly established Kentucky law setting forth Mr. … Siddiqui qualified immunity Dr.

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • White v. McKinley

    519 F.3d 806 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 26, 2008

    Consequently, to be viable, White’s claim must allege bad faith to implicate a clearly established right under Brady. … Because Richard is asserting the qualified immunity defense, he has the burden to establish the relevant predicate facts for its application. He has not done so.

    Cited 223 timesPublished
  • Golden v. Vickery

    285 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 timesPublished
  • Hollingsworth v. Hackler

    303 S.W.3d 884 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 21, 2010

    immunity shields an official performing discretionary functions from individual liability for civil damages under § 1983 if the official’s “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right. 18 A right is “clearly established” when its contours are “sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Brooks v. City of West Point

    18 F. Supp. 3d 790 · District Court, N.D. Mississippi · May 1, 2014

    a qualified immunity defense with equal specificity.” … “[A] court addressing a claim of qualified immunity must determine first whether the plaintiff has adduced facts sufficient to establish a constitutional or statutory violation.” Collier v.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Jacob 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 timesPublished
  • Whitten v. City of Omaha

    199 F. Supp. 3d 1224 · District Court, D. Nebraska · Aug 9, 2016

    were clearly established at the time it was taken. … But even assuming that Whitten has alleged a violation of his constitutional right, the contours of that right were not clearly established. *1233 The Court evaluates the defense of qualified immunity from the perspective

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • People v. Hartwick

    303 Mich. App. 247 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 19, 2013

    Accordingly, we hold that defendant failed to produce sufficient evidence at the evidentiary hearing to qualify for the § 4(d) presumption of immunity and that he is not entitled to immunity under § 4 of the MMMA. C. … Section 4(f), which provides a qualified immunity for physicians, mandates that the immunity only applies to physi *262 cians that prescribe marijuana “in the course of a bona fide physician-patient relationship ....”

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Crooks v. Maynard

    718 F. Supp. 1460 · District Court, D. Idaho · Aug 4, 1989

    This court has found no published decision which clearly defines the scope of qualified judicial immunity. This circuit has defined qualified immunity for jury commissioners and directors of jury services. … Under this qualified immunity, they were immune so long as their conduct did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable *1465 person would have known.” Id.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Estate of Escobedo v. Bender

    600 F.3d 770 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 5, 2010

    Clearly Established The Defendants claim that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established on July 19, 2005, to place them on notice that the use of tear gas and flash bang devices in … established right and therefore the Defendants are not protected by qualified immunity. 2.

    Cited 134 timesPublished
  • Jeffers v. Gomez

    267 F.3d 895 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 3, 2001

    The availability of qualified immunity in such a case naturally turns on whether it was "clearly established law" that Motive Y was impermissible. … Determining whether a public official is entitled to qualified immunity "requires a two-part inquiry: (1) Was the law governing the state official's conduct clearly established?

    Cited 241 timesPublished
  • Vakilian v. Shaw

    335 F.3d 509 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 2, 2003

    Qualified immunity shields government officials acting within the scope of their official duties from civil liability insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would … now ask whether the right was clearly established at the time of Shaw’s action.

    Cited 100 timesPublished
  • Alhadji Bayon v. Marshall Berkebile

    29 F.4th 850 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 28, 2022

    The officers moved for summary judgment, asserting that their use of force was justified and that, in any event, they were entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct did not violate clearly established law. … The officers assert they are entitled to qualified immunity because “no clearly established law put them on notice that their con- 16 duct would violate Bayon’s rights.”

    Cited 38 timesPublished
  • Ahmad v. Furlong

    435 F.3d 1196 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 18, 2006

    If the plaintiff establishes a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, he must then demonstrate that the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s unlawful conduct.” Id. … To be sure, Appellants’ motion did not clearly raise qualified immunity with respect to the RLUIPA claim.

    Cited 103 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Truelove

    District Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 26, 2020

    “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.” Kisela v. … In determining whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, courts examine (1) whether “the official violated a statutory or constitutional right,” and (2) whether “the right was ‘clearly established’ at the

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

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.