Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1898

10,000+ results

3.85s

  • Thomas L. Sluman v. State of Washington

    418 P.3d 125 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 22, 2018

    Nevertheless, the decisions do not bestow absolute immunity on the officers. In short, Thomas Sluman presents many cases that establish that Trooper Bart Olson violated his clearly established Fourth Amendment rights. … Davis, focused on whether Officer Danny Davis should receive qualified immunity.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Benavidez v. Shutiva

    8 N.M. Ct. App. 95 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Mar 31, 2015

    “The granting of qualified immunity results in immunity 5 from suit.” Oldfield v. … Since the law was not clearly established, the 4 defendants were entitled to qualified immunity and the lower court’s decision was 5 reversed. Id. 6 {41} Reichle controls our analysis here.

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • Wilson v. Montano

    715 F.3d 847 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 3, 2013

    Appellants claim they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Appellants nonetheless argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because there is no clearly established law delineating which of them had the obligation to provide Wilson with a probable cause hearing.

    Cited 250 timesPublished
  • Tan Lam v. City of Los Banos

    976 F.3d 986 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 25, 2020

    In sum, the district court properly denied the Rule 50(b) motion on qualified immunity as to Lam’s Fourth Amendment claim. The law was clearly established at the 30 LAM V. … Officer Acosta is Entitled to Qualified Immunity An officer is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct did not violate clearly established law. See Ashcroft v. al- Kidd, 563 U.S. 731, 735 (2011).

    Cited 47 timesPublished
  • Brocuglio v. Proulx

    478 F. Supp. 2d 297 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Mar 23, 2007

    Defendants also complain that I should not have granted summary judgment, because the law was not clearly established with respect to the curtilage issue, and thus the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity involves a three-step analysis: (1) whether the officials violated the plaintiffs constitutional right; (2) whether the law was clearly established with respect to that right; and (3) whether reasonable

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • United States v. Jeffrey Lynn Franklin

    235 F.3d 1165 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 20, 2000

    establish” that the predicate conviction qualified under § 924(e). … While in some cases a sentencing court properly might cumulate documentation of prior criminal convictions to find that such documentation “clearly establishes” a prior criminal conviction, in the context of an enhancement

    Overruled on other grounds by United States v. Aguila-Montes De Oca, 655 F.3d 915 (2011)Cited 91 timesPublished
  • Griffin Industries, Inc. v. Irvin

    496 F.3d 1189 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 21, 2007

    If, however, the official violated the law but his conduct was not clearly established as unlawful, the court must grant him qualified immunity. McClish, 483 F.3d at 1249. … Only when the official violated the law and the illegality of his conduct was clearly established must the court deny him the protection of qualified immunity. See Vinyard v.

    Cited 475 timesPublished
  • In the Interest of M.K.R., Minor Child, K.R., Mother, B.Y., Father

    Court of Appeals of Iowa · Jun 7, 2017

    App. 1994) (“Clearly, actions speak louder than words. Intent can be shown through conduct.”). … II is clearly outweighed by the continuing risk of harm posed by F.H.’s unresolved substance abuse issues.”).

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • BOZEMAN EX REL. ESTATE OF HAGGARD v. Orum

    302 F. Supp. 2d 1310 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Feb 9, 2004

    established law and, therefore, be entitled to qualified immunity. … immunity is clearly inappropriate.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Gruber v. Tennessee Tech Board of Trustees

    District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Dec 1, 2022

    Indeed, a number of circuits have found that constitutional rights requiring a particularized balancing test will rarely be “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes. … Second, Plaintiffs argue: Defendant also cannot establish the second element of her qualified immunity defense, because Plaintiffs’ rights were clearly established at the

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Hicks v. Feeney

    596 F. Supp. 1504 · District Court, D. Delaware · Nov 8, 1984

    This standard mandates that an official is protected by qualified immunity except when his conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” 457 U.S. … In a recent decision, the Third Circuit defined “clearly established rights” for the purposes of qualified immunity.

    Vacated by Hicks v. Feeney, 770 F.2d 375 (1985)Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Wendy Pauluk v. Glenn Savage

    836 F.3d 1117 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 8, 2016

    Qualified Immunity We apply a two-part analysis in qualified immunity cases. Kennedy, 439 F.3d at 1060 . … We conclude that the right was not clearly' established, and that Wojcik and Savage are therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 71 timesPublished
  • Athel B. Cooper, Cross-Appellee v. William E. Smith, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Camden County, Georgia

    89 F.3d 761 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 26, 1996

    applicable law was clearly established.” … For Cooper to pierce the qualified immunity protecting Smith, he must show that Smith violated one of Cooper’s “clearly established” rights under federal law. Id.

    Cited 32 timesPublished
  • Smith v. Reddy

    882 F. Supp. 497 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 6, 1995

    The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from civil suits arising from their discretionary functions, when their action “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 155-56 , 98 S.Ct. 2674, 2676-77 , 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978), established with respect to suppression hearings in criminal cases, also defines the scope of qualified immunity. See, e.g., Golino v.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Randall v. City of Fairbanks

    352 F. Supp. 2d 1028 · District Court, D. Alaska · Jan 11, 2005

    Clearly Established Rights Although Randall has shown that there may have been a violation of a constitutional right, Williamson, nonetheless, is entitled to qualified immunity if that right was not clearly established at … Because the law governing deadly force in these circumstances was not clearly established at the time of the shooting, the Court HOLDS that Wilhamson is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Christopher 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 timesPublished
  • Deanna Copeland v. Lucas Wicks

    468 S.W.3d 886 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 21, 2015

    Detective moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. In sustaining the motion, the trial court found there was no dispute as to the material facts and Detective was entitled to qualified immunity. … Law enforcement officers are not entitled to qualified immunity, however, if their actions violate a clearly established law of which a reasonable person would have known at the time of the alleged violation.

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Thomas v. Cannon

    289 F. Supp. 3d 1182 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 30, 2018

    DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR QUALIFIED IMMUNITY ...1213 A. Waiver...1213 1. Markert, Wiley, Cannon...1213 2. Zaro...1214 B. Constitutional Violation...1215 C. Clearly Established Law...1217 1. … The Court nonetheless affirmed qualified immunity for the officers because it recognized this rule was not clearly established in 1997 when the flash-bang was used. Id. at 784 .

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Garrett v. Stratman

    254 F.3d 946 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 20, 2001

    of clearly established law.” … a violation of clearly established law.”

    Cited 320 timesPublished
  • Shawn Manning v. C.J. Ryan

    13 F.4th 705 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 20, 2021

    Defendants moved for summary judgment claiming qualified immunity, arguing that Manning’s alleged right to see his children was not clearly established. … “[O]fficers are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time.” Id.

    Cited 11 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.