Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1908

10,000+ results

1.07s

  • Tarpley v. Miami-Dade County

    212 F. Supp. 3d 1273 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 21, 2016

    “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … City of Cumming, 69 F.3d 1098, 1102 (11th Cir.1995) (“Should the plaintiff fail to show that the law was clearly established at the time in question, the individual defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.”).

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Kirk Wayne McBride, Sr. v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Correctional Institutions Division

    Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Aug 28, 2008

    Government officials performing discretionary functions have qualified immunity from a suit for damages so long as the official's conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional or statutory rights of which a … Qualified immunity shields an officer if a reasonable officer could have believed the action to be lawful in light of clearly established law and the information the officer possessed. Hunter v .

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Micah Jessop v. City of Fresno

    918 F.3d 1031 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 20, 2019

    ANALYSIS “The doctrine of 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 … Assuming that to be true, however, the City Officers are entitled to qualified immunity because that right was not clearly established.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Juide v. City of Ann Arbor

    839 F. Supp. 497 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Dec 15, 1993

    They also assert the defense of qualified immunity, arguing that it was not clearly established law at the time of their alleged violation of Juide’s constitutional rights that (1) due process prohibited the issuance of a … In the absence of clearly established law which would preclude an in rem forfeiture proceeding if the privilege against self-incrimination is implicated to any degree, Markman and Best are entitled to .qualified immunity

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Walsh v. Taylor

    263 Mich. App. 618 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 10, 2004

    Taylor asserts that the undisputed facts establish his qualified immunity from plaintiffs allegations of unlawful arrest and supervisory liability. We again review de novo the circuit court’s summary disposition ruling. … In Saucier, the United States Supreme Court described as follows the standard for applying qualified immunity: A court required to rule upon the qualified immunity issue must consider, then, this threshold question: Taken

    Cited 338 timesPublished
  • Borzilleri v. Mosby

    189 F. Supp. 3d 551 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 31, 2016

    Second, regarding the First Amendment claim, she argues that she is entitled to qualified immunity because she did not violate “clearly established law.” Pearson v. … Mosby argues first that Borzilleri fails to state a claim; and second, that-she is entitled to qualified immunity on her Frist Amendment claim because she did not violate “clearly established law.” a.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Bletz v. Gribble

    641 F.3d 743 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 27, 2011

    Generally, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is proper if the officer was not on notice that his conduct was clearly unlawful. Higgason v. Stephens, 288 F.3d 868, 876 (6th Cir. 2002). … However, we reverse the district court’s decision denying Denny qualified immunity.

    Cited 167 timesPublished
  • Bacon v. Phelps

    961 F.3d 533 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 8, 2020

    There are therefore two steps to the qualified immunity analysis: first, 15 whether the plaintiff established that his constitutional rights were violated, and 16 second, whether the right at issue was “clearly established … It did not. 6 The right therefore was not “clearly established” and the defendants hence are 7 entitled to qualified immunity. See Burns v.

    Cited 96 timesPublished
  • Sanchez v. Swyden

    139 F.3d 464 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 16, 1998

    Under the test for qualified immunity, Sanchez has failed to prove that he was deprived of a clearly established constitutional right. … The Doctrine of Qualified Immunity The well-established test for qualified immunity requires us to engage in a two-step inquiry.

    Cited 53 timesPublished
  • Fletcher Small v. Officer Brock

    963 F.3d 539 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 26, 2020

    Of course, our holding does not mean that Small’s right was clearly established for the purpose of qualified immunity. But we need not resolve the issue of qualified immunity in this appeal. … But even if you doubted this precedent, there’s little doubt that the alleged constitutional violation here wasn’t clearly established and thus that the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 69 timesPublished
  • Jeffrey Forter v. Randy Greer

    536 F. App'x 724 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 2, 2013

    Moreover, defendants were entitled to qualified immunity and, as to the materials he eventually received, any injunctive relief would be moot. See Pearson v. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 243 (2009) (state officers entitled to qualified immunity if their actions did not violate clearly established law); Warsoldier, 418 at 997 n.7 (“There exists little Ninth Circuit authority construing

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Barham, Jeffrey v. Ramsey, Charles H.

    434 F.3d 565 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 13, 2006

    established constitutional rights, thus stripping appellants of any qualified immunity. … Assistant Chief Newsham’s Claim to Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

    Cited 84 timesPublished
  • Czechorowski v. State

    178 Vt. 524 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Mar 22, 2005

    Supp. 2d 241, 249 (N.D.N.Y. 2001) (caseworker who relied on autistic child’s allegations of sexual abuse through FC did not violate dearly established standard and therefore was entitled to qualified immunity). … See Cook, 167 Vt. at 509 , 712 A.2d at 384 (analyzing official’s conduct in relation to clearly established law). ¶ 27.

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • Musso v. Hourigan

    836 F.2d 736 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 5, 1988

    In reaching this result, the Court noted that the doctrine of qualified immunity rests on the belief that "where an official's duties legitimately require action in which clearly established rights are not implicated, the … Qualified Immunity 16 Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, a government official performing discretionary functions is protected from personal liability to the extent that his "conduct does not violate clearly established

    Cited 35 timesPublished
  • Kimberly Burns-Fisher v. Anna Romero-Lehrer

    57 F.4th 421 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 13, 2023

    Pendleton, 249 F.3d 279, 285 (4th Cir. 2001) (“A district court’s denial of qualified immunity is immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine, because qualified immunity confers immunity … Because it was not clearly established at the time of the incident that a defendant’s failure to act gives rise to a state-created danger claim, we conclude that Appellant is entitled to qualified immunity

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • William R. Schwartzman, M.D. v. Fred Valenzuela Bamford Frankland, David Swoap

    846 F.2d 1209 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 17, 1988

    Qualified Immunity. The appellants next argue that the district court should have granted them summary judgment based upon qualified immunity against suit. … clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

    Cited 53 timesPublished
  • Benton School District Lori Bacon, in Her Individual and Official Capacity And Lita Gattis, in Her Individual and Official Capacity v. Brandi Greer

    677 S.W.3d 799 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 9, 2023

    Section 1983 establishes a federal cause of action that can be filed in either state or federal court. Newton v. Etoch, 332 Ark. 325, 334, 965 S.W.2d 96, 100 (1998). … Smith, 366 Ark. 473, 480, 237 S.W.3d 1, 6 (2006) (finding no qualified immunity under section 301 because the official violated clearly established law); Smith v.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Kinney v. Weaver

    111 F. Supp. 2d 831 · District Court, E.D. Texas · May 16, 2000

    Nevertheless, as will be discussed in further detail in the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity test, this is irrelevant. The defendants cannot do indirectly that which they could not do directly. … similar to qualified immunity under federal law.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Rosado v. Zayas

    629 F. Supp. 911 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jan 31, 1986

    Defendant’s request for summary judgment on the grounds of qualified immunity is likewise DENIED. … A Section 1983 defendant claiming qualified or good faith immunity has the burden to prove that the law was not clearly established at the time of plaintiff’s alleged injuries, or that there exist extraordinary circumstances

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Kahle v. Leonard

    477 F.3d 544 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 12, 2007

    If the right was not clearly established, then the officer is protected by qualified immunity. 1. … Qualified Immunity 37 The second question in the qualified-immunity analysis requires us to consider whether the right that Malone allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of the violation.

    Cited 172 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.