Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1915

10,000+ results

3.66s

  • 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
  • Carswell v. Camp

    37 F.4th 1062 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 17, 2022

    But Carswell says this was “the opposite of a refusal or failure to rule” because the “district court clearly indicated it would timely address Individual Defendants’ qualified immunity defense.” … “Unless 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.”

    Cited 38 timesPublished
  • Johnny Banks v. Shelby Hawkins

    999 F.3d 521 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 27, 2021

    Where the record does not conclusively establish the lawfulness of an officer’s use of force, summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity is inappropriate. Nance v. … to overcome qualified immunity.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Toomer v. Garrett

    155 N.C. App. 462 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 31, 2002

    The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials from personal liability under § 1983 “ ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … The qualified immunity inquiry requires a determination of whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time it was allegedly violated. See Andrews, supra.

    Cited 138 timesPublished
  • Pelerin v. Carlton County

    498 N.W.2d 33 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Mar 23, 1993

    To avoid dismissal on grounds of qualified immunity, a plaintiff alleging violation of a constitutional right by a public official must allege that the violated right was “clearly established” in a particularized sense. … The law in this area was thus not “clearly established” when Pelerin was fired.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Sapp v. Cunningham

    847 F. Supp. 893 · District Court, D. Wyoming · Mar 23, 1994

    Was the Law “Clearly Established”? … The critical issue before this Court with respect to qualified immunity is whether it can be said that the defendants’ alleged failures to act violated some clearly established law in existence at that time.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Siehl v. City of Johnstown

    365 F. Supp. 3d 587 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 13, 2019

    The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that "government officials performing discretionary functions ... are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … immunity analysis-was there clearly established law-in light of their argument that there was no constitutional violation.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Prison Legal News v. Lehman

    397 F.3d 692 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 31, 2005

    immunity because they violated clearly established law. … It also properly granted qualified immunity to the prison officials on this claim because their actions did not violate clearly established law.

    Cited 116 timesPublished
  • Iqbal v. Hasty

    490 F.3d 143 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 18, 2007

    A defendant will be entitled to qualified immunity if either (1) his actions did not violate clearly established law or (2) it was objectively reasonable for him to believe that his actions did not violate clearly established … clearly established law.”

    Reversed on other grounds by Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009)Cited 595 timesPublished
  • Ernest Foster, Sr. v. Jeremy Hellawell

    908 F.3d 1204 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 20, 2018

    In deciding such legal claims, we apply the Supreme Court’s qualified immunity standard. … “Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Kisela v. Hughes, 138 S.

    Cited 91 timesPublished
  • Soto v. Chardon

    514 F. Supp. 339 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · May 7, 1981

    This principle will be borne in mind when the qualified immunity issues are considered. (Ill) Qualified Immunity from Damages A. … Liability The nature of the qualified immunity defense at common law and in § 1983 cases has been judicially established commencing with Scheuer v.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Arnette Rodgers v. 36th District Court

    529 F. App'x 642 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 3, 2013

    Katz, the Supreme Court established a two-step inquiry for determining whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity. 533 U.S. 194 , 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001). … clearly established law at the time that it was committed.

    Cited 22 timesUnpublished
  • WV Regional Jail and Correctional Facility Authority v. The Estate of COdy Lawrence Grove

    West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 20, 2020

    that he engaged in any act or omission related to the suicide of the Estate’s decedent that established the violation of a clearly established right. … 17 This Court has established numerous steps that must be examined in order to find whether qualified immunity protections apply in a particular case.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Lytle v. Brewer

    77 F. Supp. 2d 730 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Dec 22, 1999

    Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable … Brewer argues that if the plaintiffs’ rights were violated, they were not clearly established, and therefore, he should be entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Truelove v. Hunt

    67 F. Supp. 2d 569 · District Court, D. South Carolina · Sep 29, 1999

    After this finding, the Court addressed the qualified immunity question of whether the right violated was clearly established at the time of the incident. … However, the precise contours of the right are not clearly established. See id.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Grice v. McVeigh

    873 F.3d 162 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 29, 2017

    If McVeigh and Farina had a duty to intervene in those circumstances, that duty was not clearly established, and the defendants therefore enjoy qualified immunity on that claim. … Since, as we have already ruled, McVeigh did not violate clearly established law, Farina is entitled to qualified immunity as well. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the order of the district court is reversed. .

    Cited 96 timesPublished
  • Jackson v. Government of the District of Columbia

    District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 11, 2024

    “Even if there is a genuine dispute about the reasonableness of an officer’s use of force, he is protected by qualified immunity unless his force violated clearly established law.” Hedgpeth v. … Officer Lombardini asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity. Def.’s Mot. at 14–15. Jackson contends that the officer violated clearly established law and is not entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Collins v. Ainsworth

    382 F.3d 529 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 20, 2004

    Clearly established Fourth Amendment law. … Clearly established Fourteenth Amendment law.

    Cited 92 timesPublished
  • Turpin v. Ray

    319 F. Supp. 3d 191 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 12, 2018

    "clearly established" under the circumstances. … Callahan , Officers Rowley and Strange may still claim qualified immunity as long as the alleged violation was not clearly established at the time. Brown v. Fogle , 819 F.Supp.2d 23 , 28-29 (D.D.C. 2011).

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Walter Melton v. David Abston

    841 F.3d 1207 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 18, 2016

    Qualified Immunity 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 … Sullivan is not entitled to qualified immunity. See Mercado v.

    Cited 342 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.