Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
6.87s
500 U.S. 226 · Supreme Court of the United States · May 23, 1991
Once a defendant pleads a defense of qualified immunity, “[o]n summary judgment, the judge appropriately may determine, not only the currently applicable law, but whether that law was clearly established at the time an action … This case demonstrates the desirability of this approach to a claim of immunity, for Siegert failed not only to allege the violation of a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of Gilley’s actions,
Reported overruled in part, on other grounds by James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 (2007) — not on the Supreme Court's listCited 2,571 timesPublished652 F. Supp. 2d 1342 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Jul 29, 2009
A right may be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes in one of three ways: (1) “case law with indistinguishable facts clearly establishes] the constitutional right;” (2) “a broad statement of principle within … “In this circuit, the law can be ‘clearly established’ for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S.
Cited 7 timesPublished209 F. Supp. 3d 1344 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Aug 25, 2016
In the Eleventh Circuit, “the law can be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S. … “A right may be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes in one of three ways: ‘(1) case law with indistinguishable facts clearly establishing the constitutional right; (2) a broad statement of principle within
Cited 2 timesPublished421 F. Supp. 2d 1000 · District Court, E.D. Texas · Mar 10, 2006
in reference to clearly-established law. … Consequently, the court must answer the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis (has plaintiff alleged violation of a clearly established federal right?) in the negative. As such, Lt.
Cited 1 timesPublished607 P.2d 233 · Utah Supreme Court · Dec 28, 1979
establishes that a constitutional provision has been violated. … noncitizens. 7 The doctrine of fundamental rights was first established in Corfield v.
Cited 32 timesPublishedSanders v. District of Columbia
522 F. Supp. 2d 83 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 8, 2007
Qualified immunity “shields State officials from liability for their discretionary functions ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … step of the qualified immunity analysis.
Cited 43 timesPublishedGarcia-Montoya v. State Treasurer's Office
130 N.M. 25 · New Mexico Supreme Court · Jan 18, 2001
Qualified immunity “shield[s] [government officials performing discretionary functions] from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … “clearly established” at the time of the official’s conduct.
Cited 34 timesPublishedChristopher Cantu v. City of Dothan, Alabama
974 F.3d 1217 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 3, 2020
established, which entitled her to qualified immunity on the federal claim and state agent immunity on the state claim. … That means the same facts that establish an officer is not entitled to qualified immunity “also establish that [she] is not entitled to” state agent immunity. Hunter, 941 F.3d at 1284.
Cited 102 timesPublishedThomas Hayden Barnes v. Ronald M. Zaccari
669 F.3d 1295 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 7, 2012
We turn now to the second part of the qualified immunity analysis: Was Barnes’s right to this predeprivation process clearly established at the relevant time? 2. … The process due Barnes was also clearly established.
Cited 88 timesPublishedCole v. Buchanan County School Board
328 F. App'x 204 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 14, 2009
established prong” of the qualified immunity analysis). … The “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis turns on “the objective legal reasonableness of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken
Cited 9 timesUnpublishedRobert Stewart v. Donald Donges
915 F.2d 572 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 17, 1990
The test for qualified immunity is whether defendants violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Once a defendant raises the defense of qualified immunity as a defense to an action, “[t]he plaintiff carries the burden of convincing the court that the law was clearly established.”
Cited 257 timesPublished975 F.2d 1388 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 19, 1991
In opposition to the officers’ motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity, Elder proffered three out-of-state cases to show that the law was clearly established that a warrant was required to make a “constructive entry … On the issue of qualified immunity, Elder argued in the district court that the law was clearly established that an Idaho warrant was required to make a “constructive *1391 entry” over the threshold.
Reversed by Elder v. Holloway, 510 U.S. 510 (1994)Cited 23 timesPublished132 F. App'x 861 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 18, 2005
Wiggins submits that the highlighted language in Roberts clearly establishes that prosecution efforts to locate a witness must be “undertaken prior to trial” to demonstrate good-faith. … Whether the challenged photo display in this case clearly qualifies as a confirmatory identification is an issue of state law not relevant to our habeas review. See Estelle v.
Cited 7 timesPublishedTerry A. Veney v. Michael Hogan Carol Hernandez Frank D. Fleischer and Martha Knicely
70 F.3d 917 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 24, 1996
For a law to be “clearly established” in the context of qualified immunity, [t]he contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right. … The trial court need not deny a defendant the right to qualified immunity simply because a complaint adequately alleges violation of clearly established law.
Abrogated on other grounds by Carlos D. Goad and Robert J. Wuchich v. Betty Mitchell, Jacqui Visintine, and M.A. Gilbert, 297 F.3d 497 (2002)Cited 55 timesPublishedPhillips v. Roane County, Tenn.
534 F.3d 531 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 25, 2008
Under the doctrine of 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 … Was the Law Clearly Established?
Cited 963 timesPublished849 F.2d 66 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 6, 1988
Qualified or “good faith” immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … In Robison , we outlined three ways in which an official could establish his entitlement to qualified immunity.
Cited 43 timesPublished396 F. Supp. 2d 125 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Nov 2, 2005
Camilo-Robles, 151 F.3d at 6 . 5 More specifically, “the ‘clearly established’ prong of the qualified immunity inquiry is satisfied when (1) the subordinate’s actions violated a clearly established constitutional right, and … The Second Prong: Clearly Established Law The second prong of the qualified immunity analysis “deals with fair warning; it asks whether the law was clearly established at the time of the constitutional violation.”
Cited 3 timesPublished578 F. Supp. 231 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 13, 1984
The doctrine *234 of qualified immunity now focuses on whether a government official's conduct "violate[s] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … judgment based on qualified immunity.
Cited 5 timesPublishedStephen Hopkins v. Anthony Nichols
37 F.4th 1110 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 16, 2022
These errors, perhaps understandably, led the district court not to discuss the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity as it pertained to the seizure of Mrs. Hopkins. … Hopkins may have amounted to a clearly established constitutional violation. For those reasons, we conclude that the district court properly denied qualified immunity to defendants for the alleged seizure of Mrs.
Cited 17 timesPublished601 F.3d 805 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 13, 2010
Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects a government official from liability in a [42 U.S.C. §] 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of … To defeat Zefferi’s qualified immunity claim, Morris must show Zefferi potentially violated Morris’s clearly established constitutional right as a pretrial detainee to be free from being transported for ninety minutes in
Cited 138 timesPublished
Ask Donna