Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.20s
902 F.3d 500 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 31, 2018
immunity as a defense.” 3 The only pure legal question we may answer at the qualified immunity stage is “whether a given course of conduct would be objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” 4 … to the clearly-established prong of the qualified immunity analysis, and we confine our analysis accordingly. 5 Kinney, 367 F.3d at 347 (quoting Wagner v.
Cited 19 timesPublished931 F.2d 624 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 1, 1991
However, when qualified immunity is at stake, a court must first determine whether the law has been clearly established. Tribble, 860 F.2d at 324 . … By extension, the qualified immunity defense extends to conduct that does not violate clearly established statutory, constitutional, or treaty-based rights 6 The Fourth Circuit observes: Often trial can yet be avoided if
Cited 81 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · Jun 5, 2023
Since Hughes acknowledges that Knight possessed a clearly established Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessively forceful handcuffing, qualified immunity does not preclude him from standing … Kiefer, 310 F.3d 937, 944 (6th Cir. 2002) (recognizing that the “right to be free from ‘excessively forceful handcuffing’ is a clearly established right for qualified immunity purposes”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownWest 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 timesSeparateBilly Tyler v. Tom Barton and Frank O. Gunter
901 F.2d 689 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 26, 1990
An exception exists, however, where a court denies summary judgment on the issue of qualified immunity because qualified immunity provides “immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability.” … Thus, we conclude that Barton and Gunter did not violate any clearly established constitutional right. Accordingly, the doctrine of qualified immunity applies to Barton and Gunter. III.
Cited 8 timesPublishedPatricia Mueller, Paul Mueller v. Douglas Tinkham and Michael Hanlen
162 F.3d 999 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 16, 1998
his actions violated a clearly established right. … Qualified immunity protects “state actors from personal liability where their actions, though unlawful, are nevertheless objectively reasonable in light of the clearly established law.” Rogers, 133 F.3d at 1119.
Cited 37 timesPublished53 F. Supp. 2d 1027 · District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Jun 21, 1999
The defendant has submitted a Rule 50 motion based on the defense of qualified immunity. The defendant argues that Mr. … I reserved ruling on the defendant’s qualified immunity motion partly because the defendant’s tardiness in raising the qualified immunity defense had effectively defeated its goal of sparing a public employee the cost of
Cited 1 timesPublished788 F. Supp. 987 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 31, 1992
Finally, Judge Zieba argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity from Mumford’s damages claims because the law did not clearly establish whether Mumford could be discharged based on his political affiliations. … QUALIFIED IMMUNITY In his motion for summary judgment, Judge Zieba contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity from Mumford’s claim for damages because the law did not clearly establish whether Mumford could be terminated
Reversed by David M. Mumford v. Joseph Zieba, Judge, in His Official and Individual Capacities Lorain County Common Pleas Court, Domestic Relations Division, 4 F.3d 429 (1993)Cited 2 timesPublished980 N.E.2d 1275 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 14, 2012
Qualified Immunity ¶ 33 Defendants contend if we conclude the trial court erred in determining no issue of material fact exists, we should hold plaintiffs’ claims are barred by qualified immunity. ¶ 34 … the constitutional right was clearly established.
Cited 5 timesPublished33 F.3d 1240 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 30, 1994
the claim of qualified immunity. … If he was discharged in retaliation to his report, this would constitute a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.
Cited 49 timesPublished908 F. Supp. 2d 277 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 12, 2012
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: QUALIFIED IMMUNITY MARIANNE B. BOWLER, United States Magistrate Judge. … was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged violation.”
Cited 1 timesPublished2022 Ark. App. 23 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jan 19, 2022
On appeal, Sledge argues (1) that the circuit court erred in granting summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity because his complaint sufficiently alleged violation of a clearly established statutory right; and … Because Sledge sued the public officials in their official capacities only, qualified immunity is not at issue.
Cited 3 timesPublished311 F.3d 1340 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 14, 2002
be clearly unlawful, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is appropriate.” … the law applicable to particular circumstances clearly and to overcome qualified immunity even in the absence of case law.”)
Abrogated in part, on other grounds by Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009)Cited 890 timesPublished110 F. Supp. 3d 696 · District Court, N.D. Texas · May 22, 2015
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity is a doctrine designed to protect government officials sued in their individual capacity from liability for civil damages, so long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established … If a defendant successfully establishes the qualified immunity defense, he or she is completely immune from suit. See id.
Cited 13 timesPublishedLivingston Manners v. Officer Ronald Cannella
891 F.3d 959 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 4, 2018
As for the officers, they were entitled to qualified immunity because they violated no clearly established constitutional right. … Qualified immunity is appropriate if the officers’ conduct did “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Hill v.
Cited 87 timesPublished918 F.2d 1178 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 12, 1990
When a defendant raises a qualified immunity defense, “whether the conduct of which the plaintiff complains violated clearly established law” is an “essentially legal question.” … Unit A Jan.1981) was clearly established law.
Overruled in part, on other grounds by Duckett v. City of Cedar Park, 950 F.2d 272 (1992)Cited 227 timesPublished606 F.3d 646 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 26, 2010
We conclude that, even if such rights existed, they were not clearly established. We therefore affirm the grant of qualified immunity on these two claims. … We conclude, however, that James’s right to this information was not clearly established and that the offi- cials are therefore entitled to qualified immunity on these claims.
Cited 77 timesPublished87 F.4th 275 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 21, 2023
However, “[a] qualified immunity defense alters the usual summary judgment burden of proof” because the plaintiff, to overcome qualified immunity, “must rebut the defense by establishing a genuine [dispute of material … An officer is entitled to qualified immunity “if there is no violation, or if the conduct did not violate law clearly established at the time.” Id.
Cited 14 timesPublishedT.R. v. Lamar County Board of Education, The
25 F.4th 877 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 4, 2022
“A right may be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes in one of three ways: (1) case law with indistin- guishable facts clearly establishing the constitutional right; (2) a broad statement of principle within … Since the Defendants’ actions violated a clearly established constitutional right, we conclude that the Defendants are not enti- tled to qualified immunity.
Cited 19 timesPublishedLópez-Ramos v. Municipality of Cataño
556 F. Supp. 2d 59 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Feb 21, 2008
The sec ond inquiry is whether the law was clearly established at the time of the violation. See Savard, 338 F.3d at 27 . … Rather, it makes the blanket and general assertion that its officers are entitled to immunity because their conduct did not violate any clearly established constitutional rights. 1.
Cited 1 timesPublished
Ask Donna