Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
4.16s
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 timesPublished873 F. Supp. 2d 1247 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 8, 2012
“[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 should have … If a right is clearly established, a public official is granted qualified immunity only if a reasonable official would not have known that his conduct violated the clearly established right. See id.
Cited 10 timesPublished139 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 timesPublished119 Wash. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 2, 2003
These individual public officials are immune from personal liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … It is preferred that a defendant’s entitlement to qualified immunity be decided as a matter of law on summary judgment. 19 The central purpose of qualified immunity is to protect public officials from interference with their
Cited 26 timesPublished641 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 timesPublished358 F.3d 91 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 13, 2004
For a plaintiff to overcome a qualified immunity defense, he must show that his allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation; that the right was clearly established; and that a reasonable official would have … Under Wood, then, a plaintiff could usually avoid an adverse pre-trial qualified immunity ruling by merely alleging (1) a constitutional violation (2) of clearly established law (3) by a public official
Cited 90 timesPublished968 F.2d 1163 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 17, 1992
Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense which protects public officials acting within the scope of their discretionary authority and under clearly established law from insubstantial lawsuits. Butz v. … The jury was instructed to determine if defendants violated clearly established law.
Cited 20 timesPublished189 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 timesPublished962 P.2d 991 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Jun 25, 1998
conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … In determining the applicability of qualified immunity, the court need not decide whether specific actions of the officials were unconstitutional, but merely whether the conduct was so clearly unconstitutional that any reasonable
Cited 7 timesPublished787 F.3d 895 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 29, 2015
Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability unless his conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known:” Harlow v. … In a § 1983 action alleging violation of that right, qualified immunity applies when “a reasonable officer could have believed [the] arrest to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the arresting
Cited 30 timesPublishedPatrick Devlin v. Richard Kalm
531 F. App'x 697 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 15, 2013
In order to overcome the defendants’ assertion of qualified immunity, Devlin must show that the defendants (1) violated his constitutional rights and (2) that those rights were clearly established at the time … “Clearly established” rights must be defined at an “appropriate level of generality” to avoid “collapsing the two qualified- immunity inquiries into one” without being so narrow that no violation can ever be found.
Cited 11 timesUnpublishedFletcher 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 timesPublished2025 ND 92 · North Dakota Supreme Court · May 8, 2025
Wishnatsky, at 401. [¶18] Wagendorf and Nelson are protected by qualified immunity unless the Park “pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly … A constitutional right is “clearly established” if the “contours of the right [are] sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.
Cited 0 timesPublished18 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 timesPublished457 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 timesPublished338 F. Supp. 2d 48 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 24, 2004
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY STANDARD “Qualified immunity shields officials from liability for damages so long as their actions were objectively reasonable, as measured in the light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established … This lack of clearly established law is relevant both to determining the “reasonableness” of an officer’s actions and whether the officer is entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 16 timesPublished629 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 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Jul 23, 2020
Even if Johnson isn’t controlling, it is strong evidence that it wasn’t clearly established in December 2018 that defendants’ conduct violated the Eighth Amendment. So defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … Haessig, 788 F.3d 662, 666 (7th Cir. 2015) (“The defense of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional
Cited 0 timesUnknown904 F.3d 1145 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 24, 2018
Defendants moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … clearly established at the time of the conduct at issue" (quotation and alteration omitted)).
Cited 32 timesPublished95 S.W.3d 683 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Dec 27, 2002
Government officials performing discretionary functions have qualified immunity from liability for actions that do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … in light of the clearly established rights.
Cited 29 timesPublished
Ask Donna