Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1908

10,000+ results

2.87s

  • Doctor Awanna Leslie v. Hancock County Board of Education

    720 F.3d 1338 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 12, 2013

    had was not clearly established. … “[T]o obtain qualified immunity, an official must first establish that he acted within his discretionary authority.”

    Cited 36 timesPublished
  • MIMICS, Inc. v. Village of Angel Fire

    394 F.3d 836 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 3, 2005

    Usually, if the law was clearly established at the time of the relevant events, the qualified immunity defense will fail. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818-19 (1982). … Id. at 934. 8 The purpose of requiring the law to be clearly established in qualified immunity determinations is so state officials have fair notice that their conduct is unconstitutional.

    Cited 86 timesPublished
  • Esposito v. Williamson

    854 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
  • Heaney v. Roberts

    147 F. Supp. 3d 600 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Dec 2, 2015

    Roberts’ contention - with respect to qualified immunity is that his actions were objectively reasonable, and that on September 18, 2013, the law was not clearly established such that the actions he took constituted a First … The qualified immunity analysis is a two-step inquiry. First, a court must decide whether a plaintiffs allegation, if true, establishes a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Wyatt v.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Zar v. Payne

    760 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 timesPublished
  • Wright v. Watson

    209 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 timesPublished
  • Maxey ex rel. Maxey v. Fulton

    890 F.2d 279 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 29, 1989

    The Court reasoned that a denial of qualified immunity is conclusive because the court is deciding either that (1) the defendant violated clearly established law and is not entitled to immunity, or (2) that if the facts are … Mitchell itself recognizes that there will be times when discovery is proper: Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Sorenson v. Ferrie

    134 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 timesPublished
  • DeShawn Anderson-Santos v. Kent County, Mich.

    94 F.4th 550 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 29, 2024

    Page 7 clearly-established constitutional violation based on his version of the facts, fails to present us with a legal issue and relegates his claim to a factual dispute over which we cannot exercise jurisdiction. … of clearly established law.”

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Ball v. Cook County School District

    889 F. Supp. 492 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Jun 13, 1995

    For the law to be clearly established to the point that qualified immunity does not apply, the law must have earlier been developed in such a concrete and factually defined context to make it obvious to all reasonable government … Government actors performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from civil trials for money damages and may not be held liable in their individual capacity if their conduct violates no clearly established

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Prison 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 timesPublished
  • Christian v. Fontenot

    672 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 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
  • Corey Airport Services, Inc. v. DeCosta

    587 F.3d 1280 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 16, 2009

    We conclude that these Defendants did not violate a clearly established constitutional right and are therefore entitled to qualified immunity. I. … Because this is not such a case, the Defendants did not violate a clearly established constitutional right and are therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • Crehan v. Davis

    713 F. Supp. 2d 688 · District Court, W.D. Michigan · May 18, 2010

    “Ordinarily, a Supreme Court or Sixth Circuit [Court of Appeals] decision on point is necessary” to clearly establish the right in the relevant context and defeat qualified immunity. See Reynolds v. … With no clearly established law in place .... ”)). 10 *697 This means that Crehan cannot defeat Officer Davis’s qualified-immunity defense w+nt “clearly establishing” her general Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Lachance v. Town of Charlton, Corp.

    368 F. Supp. 3d 231 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 21, 2019

    Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. The First Circuit has adopted a two-part test to assess qualified immunity. … Thus, because Defendants do not argue they are entitled to qualified immunity for the common law claims, this Court need not address the existence of state qualified immunity.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Cottone v. Jenne

    326 F.3d 1352 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 11, 2003

    [u]nless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” Id. … The Supreme Court has established a two-part test to determine the applicability of qualified immunity.

    Overruled in part, on other grounds by Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009)Cited 383 timesPublished
  • David Sims v. City of Madisonville

    894 F.3d 632 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 28, 2018

    That is because of the second part of the qualified immunity inquiry, which requires a plaintiff to show that any violation of rights was clearly established at the time the conduct occurred. 4 When Sims was terminated in … established when Sims was fired in 2012, and Covington was entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 105 timesPublished
  • Rodriquez v. Furtado

    771 F. Supp. 1245 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 11, 1991

    The Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has recently interpreted these holdings to establish a two-part objective test for qualified immunity claims: First, if the right asserted by the plaintiff was “clearly established … Therefore, Detective Furtado is entitled to qualified immunity because a reasonable person in his position would not have known he was violating any clearly established constitutional rights of plaintiff. 2.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Palmer, Brady v. Eisenhauer, Scott

    District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Aug 14, 2024

    Qualified Immunity Officer Pride also contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity from Palmer’s claims because his conduct did not violate a clearly established … Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for damages unless they “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.” Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

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.