Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
3.93s
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 timesPublished642 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 timesPublishedDistrict 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 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 timesPublished68 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 timesPublished37 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 timesPublished297 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 timesPublished342 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 timesPublished899 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 timesPublished436 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 timesPublished476 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 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 timesPublished147 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 timesPublished405 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 timesPublished685 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 timesPublishedGoodman 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 timesPublishedJohn 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 timesPublishedBingham 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 timesPublished918 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 timesPublishedAHE 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