Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.63s
203 Ariz. 313 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Sep 10, 2002
secured by the Constitution and laws.... ” ¶ 23 To prevail on such claims, a plaintiff must overcome a qualified immunity defense by proving: (1) the defendants violated one of the plaintiffs clearly established rights; … Youngberg arguably reaches the constitutional right Weatherford asserts to be clearly established. ¶ 27 Moreover, Weatherford points out that decisions from eight federal courts support the assertion of a clearly established
Cited 2 timesPublished500 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 timesPublished21 F. Supp. 3d 966 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 28, 2014
Qualified immunity “protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional *970 rights of which a reasonable person would … Count I *974 is dismissed because Anderson did not violate any “clearly established” constitutional right under the Fourth Amendment and is thus entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 1 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 timesPublishedSchatz Schatz Family v. Gierer
346 F.3d 1157 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 16, 2003
Where jurisdiction is appropriate, the scope of appeal is limited to the narrow issue of whether plaintiffs have alleged a violation of "clearly established" law. See Johnson v. … Jones, 515 U.S. 304, 313 , 115 S.Ct. 2151 , 132 L.Ed.2d 238 (1995). 4 The district court announced the proper standard for addressing qualified immunity at the Rule 12(b)(6) stage — whether immunity is established on the
Cited 26 timesPublished760 F. Supp. 2d 779 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 12, 2011
Qualified Immunity The Defendants argue that the doctrine of qualified immunity forecloses the Plaintiffs claims for warrantless entry into her home and use of excessive force. … According to the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions are generally shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established
Cited 2 timesPublished660 F.3d 931 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 8, 2011
In order to determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, we must look at the objective reasonableness of the officer’s conduct in relation to clearly established law. Id. … to qualified immunity.
Cited 27 timesPublished937 P.2d 1337 · Wyoming Supreme Court · May 23, 1997
The standard of qualified immunity established under our common law is distinct from the federal standard. 4 In Dar-rar v. … In his summary judgment materials, Renner bases his entitlement to qualified immunity on the federal standard, stating that he acted in good faith at all times and violated no clearly established law.
Cited 23 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 5, 2019
And, through his answer, Digby asserted qualified immunity. See id., ¶¶ 2.5, 2.6, & 2.7. … See Wicks, 41 F.3d at 994; Backe, 691 F.3d at 648 (“[T]his court has established a careful procedure under which a district court may defer its qualified immunity ruling if further factual development is necessary
Cited 0 timesUnknown977 F.2d 1392 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 19, 1992
The Supervisors therefore should have been granted qualified immunity on this claim because their conduct did not violate any clearly established law constituting constructive discharge. 2. … ’s constructive discharge claim, but they have not established qualified immunity as to the constructive discharge claims of Molina and DeSomber; Williams, Sackett and *1405 Mitchell are entitled to qualified immunity on
Cited 294 timesPublished672 So. 2d 436 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 8, 1996
To avoid the protection of qualified immunity on the basis that the right which *446 the official allegedly violated is "clearly established," the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official … Plaintiffs would be able to convert the rule of qualified immunity that our cases clearly establish into a rule of virtually unqualified liability simply by alleging violation of extremely abstract rights. 483 U.S. at 639
Cited 8 timesPublished23 F.4th 863 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 6, 2022
To determine whether an officer enjoys qualified immunity, the court asks, in the order it chooses, (i) whether the alleged misconduct violated a constitutional right and (ii) whether the right was clearly established at … Pralgo and Callahan-English violated clearly established law.
Cited 118 timesPublishedRoger Gillispie v. Miami Twp., Ohio
18 F.4th 909 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 30, 2021
“[T]he precise scope of our appellate jurisdiction on interlocutory appeal from a denial of qualified immunity is whether ‘the plaintiff’s version of facts demonstrates a violation of clearly established rights.’” … one and two of the qualified immunity inquiry.”
Cited 25 timesPublished134 F.3d 325 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 11, 1998
Claims of qualified immunity are reviewed under a two-step analysis. The first question is whether the plaintiff has asserted the violation of a clearly established constitutional right. … We hold only that, for purposes of qualified immunity in this civil case, the law was not clearly established on this question as of the date of this incident.
Cited 67 timesPublishedPrison Legal News, Inc. v. Simmons
401 F. Supp. 2d 1181 · District Court, D. Kansas · Nov 22, 2005
If plaintiffs make this showing, defendants may still be entitled to qualified immunity if they can show that their actions were nonetheless reasonable in light of the clearly established law. Roska ex rel. Roska v. … “A defendant who has appropriately pleaded the affirmative defense of qualified immunity may establish his right to immunity at any point in the proceeding, including at trial.” Guffey v.
Cited 7 timesPublished877 F. Supp. 73 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Dec 30, 1994
Whereas officials cloaked in absolute immunity are automatically protected against all suits for monetary damages, officials who are entitled to qualified immunity are amenable to suit only when they violate a “clearly established … Qualified immunity protects government officials when their performance of a discretionary function does “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”
Cited 17 timesPublishedKravitz v. Police Department of the Hudson
285 A.D.2d 716 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 5, 2001
“A government official performing a discretionary function is entitled to qualified immunity provided his or her conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … “The defendant must establish that he [or she] had an objectively reasonable belief that his [or her] act violated no clearly established rights [citation omitted]” (Young v Selsky, 41 F3d 47, 54 , cert denied 514 US 1102
Cited 5 timesPublishedTyner v. STATE, DEPT. OF SOCIAL & HEALTH
137 Wash. App. 545 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 13, 2007
Qualified Immunity ¶ 26 DSHS contends that its officers are entitled to qualified immunity from Tyner's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 First Amendment claim because "[t]here is no law clearly establishing that criticizing one's supervisor … We explained qualified immunity in Wilson: Public officials are immune from suit unless the "law clearly proscribed the actions" they took.
Cited 31 timesPublishedWinberry Realty Partnership v. Borough of Rutherford (083156) (Bergen County & Statewide)
Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 28, 2021
The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants, finding that the Tax Collector was entitled to qualified immunity on the ground that she did not violate the clearly established constitutional or statutory … “The doctrine of qualified immunity generally protects government officials from 24 civil liability for discretionary acts that do ‘not violate clearly established statutory or
Cited 0 timesPublished854 So. 2d 694 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 25, 2003
Ordinarily, police officers are entitled to qualified immunity, which shields them from personal liability under § 1983. Moody v. City of Key West, 805 So.2d 1018 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). … To overcome a claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show that the defendant engaged in conduct that violated clearly established law. Id. at 1021 .
Cited 1 timesPublished
Ask Donna