Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.43s
Tripp v. Department of Defense
173 F. Supp. 2d 58 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 30, 2001
Defendants Did Not Violate Clearly Established Law Most executive officials are immune from suits alleging constitutional and statutory violations unless they violate “clearly established” statutory or constitutional rights … In discussing the qualified immunity standard, those courts have focused primarily on the question of a violation of clearly established law. See, e.g., Anderson v.
Cited 1 timesPublished890 F. Supp. 1474 · District Court, D. Wyoming · Oct 5, 1994
and law to establish that the defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity. … immunity and do more than identify, in the abstract, a clearly established right.
Cited 10 timesPublished372 F. Supp. 3d 1156 · District Court, D. Kansas · Mar 13, 2019
was clearly established at the time of the defendant's unlawful conduct." 15 Therefore, "[t]o survive a motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity, the plaintiff must allege sufficient facts that show-when taken as true-the … Clearly Established Law Under the second prong of the qualified immunity test, Sullivan is entitled *1165 to immunity unless his alleged actions violated a clearly established right.
Cited 7 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 7, 2026
The district court refused to grant qualified immunity to the officers at the summary-judgment stage. Because the officers did not violate any clearly established law by handcuffing Lewis, we REVERSE. … With or without notice, the Officers’ conduct does not amount to a violation of clearly established law. 3 The district court should have granted qualified immunity to the Officers.
Cited 0 timesPublished875 F. Supp. 2d 1221 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 21, 2012
Qualified Immunity Analysis Qualified immunity shields public officials from civil damages for the performance of their discretionary functions. … Even if the constitutional rights of the plaintiff were violated, unless the right is clearly established, the officer is entitled to qualified immunity. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .
Cited 4 timesPublished873 F. Supp. 2d 1117 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Jun 4, 2012
Qualified immunity Both Johnson and Ware raise the issue of qualified immunity. … immunity was still appropriate, however, because the law was not clearly established)).
Cited 6 timesPublished195 Vt. 308 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Dec 6, 2013
We first address the superior court’s ruling that defendant is entitled to qualified official immunity under, the circumstances of this case. * “Qualified immunity attaches to public officials who are (1) acting during the … An objective person in defendant’s position could not have believed that his conduct violated clearly established law. ¶ 16.
Cited 29 timesPublished55 F.3d 1123 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 31, 1995
A violation of a clearly established state law can only surmount qualified immunity if it embodies the federal right that is the basis of the § 1983 action. Davis v. … Thus, the defendants did not violate the plaintiff’s clearly established federal rights, and therefore they have qualified immunity from plaintiffs § 1983 claims.
Cited 44 timesPublished328 F. Supp. 3d 1170 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 16, 2018
was not clearly established. 4 Under the qualified immunity doctrine, "government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate … A two-part test resolves claims of qualified immunity by determining whether plaintiffs have alleged facts that "make out a violation of a constitutional right," and if so, whether the "right at issue was 'clearly established
Cited 7 timesPublishedJames Setchfield v. Scott Ronald
109 F.4th 1084 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 31, 2024
“To defeat qualified immunity, [the plaintiff] must prove that: (1) the facts, viewed in the light most favorable to him, demonstrate the deprivation of a constitutional or statutory right; and (2) the right was clearly established … Under these circumstances, it was unreasonable to use more than de minimis force against him.3 Since Setchfield has established his excessive-force claim, we next turn to the clearly established prong of the qualified-immunity
Cited 7 timesPublished419 Mont. 1 · Montana Supreme Court · Nov 12, 2024
Qualified Prosecutorial Immunity. … Ct. at 2815 (government officer “entitled to dismissal” of compensatory civil claim due to qualified immunity “[u]nless the [complaint] allegations” are facially sufficient to “state a claim of violation of clearly established
Cited 2 timesPublished114 F.3d 3 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · May 30, 1997
The Qualified Immunity Standard A. … of clearly established law, was met.
Cited 63 timesPublishedWest Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 15, 2023
Devono now assert the defense of qualified immunity? … Hall, 828 F.3d 298, 303 (4th Cir. 2016) (“Qualified immunity shields government officials from personal liability when their conduct does not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known
Cited 0 timesSeparateCathy Neely, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. Stephen Feinstein, Defendants-Appellants-Cross
50 F.3d 1502 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 3, 1995
Defendant Feinstein The district court concluded that Feinstein was not entitled to qualified immunity because the law was clearly established that hospital officials must ensure their patients’ safety, and that the record … Was the Law Clearly Established?
Overruled in part, on other grounds by L.W. v. Dee Grubbs Thomas Nelson Marlin Hutton Richard Hill, 92 F.3d 894 (1996)Cited 82 timesPublished145 F.3d 1231 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 2, 1998
suit unless they violate clearly established law”). … The same facts which establish Sergeant Williams’ entitlement to qualified immunity establish that his acts were not willful, malicious or in bad faith.
Cited 100 timesPublished624 A.2d 479 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 11, 1993
On a motion by Levesque, the court dismissed the civil rights claim finding that Levesque did not violate any clearly established statutory or constitutional rights and therefore was en *482 titled to qualified immunity. … Malice or improper motive, alone, is not sufficient to defeat qualified immunity. Myers, 810 F.2d at 1457 . An official’s entitlement to qualified immunity is a legal, not a factual issue. Snell v.
Cited 28 timesPublishedLena Davenport v. Borough of Homestead
870 F.3d 273 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 29, 2017
clearly established law. … IV “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have
Cited 52 timesPublished786 F.3d 529 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 11, 2015
In holding that the complaint alleges a violation of clearly established constitutional law, we express no opinion on the propriety of qualified immunity at a later stage of litigation. E. … The qualified immunity defense focuses instead on whether the official defendant’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.
Cited 125 timesPublished851 F.2d 1321 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 10, 1988
case are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity The district court found that P & M acted in good faith reliance upon laws which were not clearly unconstitutional.
Vacated on other grounds by Vroom Developments (Florida), Inc. v. Town of Longboat Key, 489 U.S. 1002 (1989)Cited 33 timesPublished585 F.3d 1097 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 9, 2009
Where “the unlawfulness of the officers’ conduct ... was not clearly established, [the officers] are entitled to qualified immunity.” Pearson, 129 S.Ct. at 823 . … In analyzing a claim of qualified immunity, we therefore look at the specific actions of the officer to determine whether it was clearly established that his actions violated the inmate’s rights.
Overruled on other grounds by Stephen McCrary v. Kenneth Baudwin, 500 F. App'x 551 (2013)Cited 27 timesPublished
Ask Donna