Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1924

10,000+ results

1.88s

  • Wertenbroch v. Hardeman

    Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 3, 2026

    Typically, qualified immunity hinges on “whether the federal right allegedly infringed was ‘clearly established.’” Behrens v. Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 313 (1996) (citation omitted). … But the magistrate judge never analyzed whether Plaintiffs rights were clearly established. Nor did he affirmatively conclude that he was denying qualified immunity to Hardeman.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Burt v. Carlson

    752 F. Supp. 346 · District Court, C.D. California · Oct 12, 1990

    There are two kinds of immunity. One is absolute immunity, and the other is qualified or good-faith immunity. … Under qualified immunity, government officials are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Brown & Gay Engineering, Inc. v. Zuleima Olivares, Individually and as the Representative of the Estate of Pedro Olivares, Jr., & Pedro Olivares

    58 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 678 · Texas Supreme Court · Apr 24, 2015

    Brown & Gay’s reliance on Filar-sky's qualified-immunity analysis is misplaced. … The federal doctrine of 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

    Cited 143 timesPublished
  • Baggerly v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

    370 S.C. 362 · Supreme Court of South Carolina · Aug 28, 2006

    Causation-in-fact is proved by establishing the injury would not have occurred “but for” the defendant’s negligence, and legal cause is proved by establishing foreseeability. Id. … or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify.”

    Cited 51 timesPublished
  • Wilson v. Kittoe

    229 F. Supp. 2d 520 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Nov 7, 2002

    Clearly Established The Fourth Amendment right to be free from arrest in the absence of probable cause is clearly established. See Henderson, 223 F.3d at 273 . … But, “if the test of ‘clearly established law' were to be applied at this level of generality, ... plaintiffs would be able to convert the rule of qualified immunity ... into a rule of virtually unqualified liability.”

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Reed v. Taylor

    923 F.3d 411 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 2, 2019

    The district court granted summary judgment to the officials based on qualified immunity, holding that the threat of criminal prosecution wasn't "other legal process" under clearly established law. Reed appealed. … "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 known.'

    Cited 38 timesPublished
  • Lawrenz v. James

    852 F. Supp. 986 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 6, 1994

    Thus, if the applicable law was not clearly established, or if the law was clearly established and Defendant James did not violate that law in terminating Plaintiff, he is entitled to qualified immunity. … CONCLUSION Defendant James is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate clearly established law in terminating Plaintiff.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Michael Charles Ward v. Dennis Dyke Fred Christians Robert J. Mayer Sherry Burt, Dan Bolden Donald Houseworth Robert Brown, Jr. David Haskell, Warden

    58 F.3d 271 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 29, 1995

    Defendants contend that Ward has failed to allege the violation of a clearly established right. … Therefore, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. 4 IV. For the reasons set forth above, we REVERSE the district court’s denial of qualified immunity. 1 .

    Cited 127 timesPublished
  • Marwan Mahajni v. Vu Do

    Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 13, 2026

    On the immunity issues, it denied qualified immunity to Deputy Do, ruling that United States ex rel. Tobe was an anal- ogous case and clearly established that Deputy Do’s conduct violated Mr. … Deputy Woida is entitled to qualified immunity for a sec- ond reason—there’s no clearly established law that says that a bailiff who fails to stop someone else from making an im- proper statement to a juror violates a defendant

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • William C. Powell v. Thomas J. Mikulecky, George Oates, Ruth Stephens and Wendall Gilliam

    891 F.2d 1454 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 15, 1989

    The test for qualified immunity is whether defendants violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Once a defendant raises the defense of qualified immunity as a defense to an action, “[t]he plaintiff carries the burden of convincing the court that the law was clearly established.”

    Cited 115 timesPublished
  • Lojuk v. Johnson

    770 F.2d 619 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 8, 1985

    and qualified immunity. … Plaintiff argued in the alternative that even if defendants had not violated clearly established constitutional rights, they should be denied qualified immunity because they had violated a state administrative regulation.

    Cited 65 timesPublished
  • Ralston v. Cannon

    884 F.3d 1060 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 13, 2018

    The district court denied Cannon’s request for qualified immunity. … Procedural Background Cannon filed a motion for summary judgment, claiming he was entitled to qualified immunity. 2 He asserted that to establish a violation of the Free Exercise Clause, Ralston “must show that his

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Tommy D. Hopkins v. John L. Saunders, Kyle Vickers, Charles Ausfahl, Roy Temple, Beth M. Wheeler

    93 F.3d 522 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 23, 1996

    Qualified Immunity Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are generally immune from suit in performing discretionary duties if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … The district court determined, however, that the right to such a hearing was clearly established by section 105.055 and thus denied the officials qualified immunity. We disagree.

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Ethan James Charles v. Jeff Johnson

    18 F.4th 686 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 16, 2021

    To lose qualified immunity, the circumstances must show that the force was clearly excessive. See Post v. … Once we determined that the use of force was ex- cessive, the next question in the qualified immunity analysis asks whether the officer violated clearly established law.

    Cited 105 timesPublished
  • Estate of Bleck ex rel. Churchill v. Martinez

    383 P.3d 39 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Mar 27, 2014

    ’s motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity. … On appeal, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of the Fourth Amendment claim against Officer Martinez, concluding that he could not be found to have violated clearly established Fourth

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Baptiste v. Griffin

    District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 31, 2019

    Therefore, a qualified immunity analysis is not necessary. … violate any clearly established right of Plaintiff.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Murray v. Poani

    980 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 timesPublished
  • Soscia Holdings, LLC v. P State of Rhode Island, et al.

    2023 DNH 074 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Jun 15, 2023

    Qualified immunity applies where: (1) a federal right was violated, and (2) “the 21 unlawfulness of the conduct was clearly established at the time.” … Courts may begin the qualified immunity analysis by considering the clearly established prong. Id.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Mark Campbell v. Cheatham County Sheriff's Dep't

    47 F.4th 468 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 29, 2022

    Therefore, we turn to whether the right was clearly established. 3 An officer is not entitled to qualified immunity if he violates a constitutional right … “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 known.”

    Cited 38 timesPublished
  • Farid v. Ellen

    593 F.3d 233 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 28, 2010

    For qualified immunity purposes, however, we must more precisely define the rights at issue, and only then determine whether they were “clearly established.” … For qualified immunity purposes, however, there is a separate question, which is whether the right violated by this conduct was clearly established.

    Cited 270 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.