Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2012

10,000+ results

3.93s

  • Butler v. City of Norman

    992 F.2d 1053 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 28, 1993

    official violated the clearly established law. … In Mitchell the Court held: Unless the plaintiffs 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 64 timesPublished
  • Sorano v. Taggart

    642 F. Supp. 2d 45 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 29, 2009

    “Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … Qualified Immunity — The Merits “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

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • District of Columbia v. Jackson

    810 A.2d 388 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 14, 2002

    that the officers acted beyond the reach of qualified immunity protection). … That "general proposition,” the.Supreme Court reiterated in Saucier, "is not enough” to resolve the immunity question; instead "the right the official is alleged to have violated must have been clearly established in a more

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • Mumford v. Zieba

    788 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 timesPublished
  • Cole v. Hunter

    68 F. Supp. 3d 628 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 22, 2014

    Officers Hunter and Cassidy’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based Upon Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials sued pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §,1983 “from liability for civil damages … Factual Showing Having affirmed that Plaintiffs alleged a violation of a clearly established right, the Court turns now to the remaining inquiry in the qualified immunity anal *644 ysis.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Guan v. City of New York

    37 F.4th 797 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 17, 2022

    Qualified Immunity Even where actual probable cause does not exist, police officers may be entitled to qualified immunity from a § 1983 false arrest claim if their actions did not violate "clearly established … Accordingly, we hold that Boyle and Larasaavedra are protected by qualified immunity because it was not clearly established when they arrested Guan in 2017 that they had to have probable cause to arrest her for an emergency

    Cited 70 timesPublished
  • Hall v. Stewart

    297 F. Supp. 2d 1328 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 16, 2004

    The Supreme Court has established a two-part test for evaluating claims of qualified immunity. … We find it does not ... ”). 3 Because no “offensiveness to others” element was clearly established under Fla. Stat. § 796.07 at the time of the arrests, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Santana v. Calderon

    342 F.3d 18 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Aug 26, 2003

    It is important for the "clearly established" prong of the qualified immunity analysis to note that Quiles was decided on November 7, 2001, after Santana's dismissal from her job in this case. … the Puerto Rico Constitution, is to focus on the second step of the qualified immunity analysis -- the clearly established question

    Cited 127 timesPublished
  • Ross v. Early

    899 F. Supp. 2d 415 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 25, 2012

    Thus, if the right was not clearly established, for example, Officer Early would be entitled to qualified immunity without an assessment of the first prong. … Determination of a violation of constitutional rights is no longer a predicate for assessing qualified immunity; a court may first address whether the right allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of the violation

    Cited 40 timesPublished
  • Early v. Crockett

    436 S.W.3d 141 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 19, 2014

    “Under the standard of qualified immunity articulated in Harlow v. … “The more critical inquiry for qualified-immunity purposes is whether it was ‘objectively legally reasonable’ for the prison officials to believe that [their] conduct did not violate the inmate’s clearly established Eighth

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Ann Robinette Eric Robinette v. William Jones Richard Fentiman Tim Gassen Joshua Landis Merritt M. Beck, III City of Centralia, Missouri

    476 F.3d 585 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 8, 2007

    Whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity depends upon the “objective legal reasonableness” of the official’s actions “assessed in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ ” at the time of the … Robi-nette, the constitutional right was not clearly established. 8 The warrant to arrest Ms.

    Cited 143 timesPublished
  • Shepard v. Hansford County

    110 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 timesPublished
  • Moran v. Washington

    147 F.3d 839 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 2, 1998

    established” to defeat Senn’s assertion of qualified immunity. … established to defeat qualified immunity. .

    Cited 86 timesPublished
  • Allah v. Goord

    405 F. Supp. 2d 265 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 13, 2005

    Qualified Immunity Standard The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability as long as “ ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … However, if a violation is proven, “the next sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established.” 27 Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • Green v. Tudor

    685 F. Supp. 2d 678 · District Court, W.D. Michigan · Jan 29, 2010

    The second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry is whether the right was “clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.” Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . … Williams, 320 Fed.Appx. 678, 679 (9th Cir.2009) (defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on prisoner’s RLUIPA and Free Exercise Clause Claims because he did not have a clearly established right to halal meals); see

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Goodman v. Town of Golden Beach

    988 F. Supp. 1450 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Oct 8, 1997

    of that clearly-established law. … Goodman was unnecessary and excessive, the officers are entitled to qualified immunity unless it was clearly established that the amount of force used was unlawful.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • John Kelly, Jr. v. Steven Curtis Julie M. Gibson J.R. Moore Chatham County, Ga

    21 F.3d 1544 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 8, 1994

    Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability under federal law unless their conduct violates a “clearly established [federal] statutory or constitutional right[ … By distinguishing these two out-of-circuit decisions that Kelly has cited, we do not mean to imply that the law can be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes by non-binding precedent. See Hansen v.

    Cited 209 timesPublished
  • Bingham v. City of Manhattan Beach

    341 F.3d 939 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 28, 2003

    He posits a novel twist to the “clearly established” inquiry, contending that because it is not clearly established that damages may be obtained under § 1983 for an unlawful traffic stop, qualified immunity should apply. … Rather, in determining whether qualified immunity is available, those cases merely inquire whether the right at issue was clearly established in law.

    Overruled on other grounds by Edgerly v. City and County of San Francisco, 599 F.3d 946 (2010)Cited 106 timesPublished
  • John W. Burgess Linda M. Burgess, Husband and Wife v. Pierce County, a Municipal Corporation Joseph Stortini Jane "Doe" Stortini, Husband and Wife

    918 F.2d 104 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 2, 1990

    The scope of our review is detailed in Mitchell : 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 … “[S]tate and local officials are entitled to qualified immunity if ‘their conduct [did] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Manhattan Beach

    Abrogated on other grounds by Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304 (1995)Cited 19 timesPublished
  • AHE Realty Assoc., LLC v. Miami-Dade Cnty.

    320 F. Supp. 3d 1322 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 29, 2018

    Qualified Immunity Naranjo also states he is entitled to qualified immunity. … A defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal "unless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law." Cottone v. Jenne , 326 F.3d 1352 , 1357 (11th Cir. 2003).

    Cited 4 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.