Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2012

10,000+ results

2.68s

  • 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
  • Linda Sexton v. Thomas Cernuto

    18 F.4th 177 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 8, 2021

    Qualified immunity “shields government officials from ‘liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of 2 The district … The qualified immunity analysis has two parts.

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • Charles Waters v. B. Madson

    921 F.3d 725 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 11, 2019

    To overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must allege (1) a violation of his statutory or constitutional rights, and (2) that “the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of [the] defendant’s alleged misconduct … De La Rosa, 852 F.3d at 745-46 (examining arguable reasonable suspicion under the “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity).

    Cited 225 timesPublished
  • Estate of Lopez v. Gelhaus

    149 F. Supp. 3d 1154 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 20, 2016

    The defense 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 … Based on the review of the cases above, the court finds *1165 that it was clearly established, and thus, qualified immunity does not shield Gelhaus from liability.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Omar Paez v. Claudia Mulvey

    915 F.3d 1276 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 8, 2019

    The arresting officer would be entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff establishes that “(1) [she] violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of [her] conduct was ‘clearly … Since there was no Fourth Amendment violation, much less a clearly established Fourth Amendment violation, Breeden and Sullivan are entitled to qualified immunity as well.

    Cited 236 timesPublished
  • Southern California Rapid Transit District v. Superior Court

    30 Cal. App. 4th 713 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 30, 1994

    They dismiss defendants’ argument that the court failed to rule on their qualified immunity defense. … However, the qualified immunity under federal law upon which the defendants rely here does not apply if their actions violated a clearly established *731 statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable person should

    Cited 41 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • Richard Rockwell v. City of Garland, Texas

    664 F.3d 985 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 15, 2011

    The burden is on the Rockwells to rebut the officers’ qualified-immunity defense “by establishing a genuine fact issue as to whether the [officers’] allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law.” Id. … Smith, 117 F.3d 866, 871 (5th Cir.1997) ("[Wjhere the complained of conduct is a law enforcement warrantless search of a residence, qualified immunity turns not only on whether it was then clearly established that such a

    Cited 141 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
  • Roger Lee v. William Driscoll

    871 F.3d 581 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 7, 2017

    “We review de novo the district court’s denial of qualified immunity.” Id. at 813 . … a constitutional right’; and (2) whether the asserted constitutional right is clearly established.”

    Cited 12 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
  • Sandoval v. County of Sonoma

    72 F. Supp. 3d 997 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 29, 2014

    “[C]ourts may grant qualified immunity on the ground that a purported right was not ‘clearly established’ by prior case law....” Reichle v. Howards, — U.S. —, 132 S.Ct. 2088, 2093 , 182 L.Ed.2d 985 (2012). … A Court may grant “qualified immunity on the ground that a purported right was not ‘clearly established’ by prior case law....” Reichle v.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Eunice Winzer v. Kaufman County

    916 F.3d 464 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 18, 2019

    alleged show the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right;’ and second, ‘whether the right was clearly established.’” … The majority has correctly concluded that Officer Hinds is entitled to qualified immunity due to the lack of clearly established law.

    Cited 128 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
  • 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
  • Gallimore ex rel. W.S.G. v. Henrico County School Board

    38 F. Supp. 3d 721 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Aug 5, 2014

    “A school official searching a student is ‘entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment.’ ” Id. at 377 , 129 S.Ct. 2633 (quoting Pearson v. … “[W]here no reasonable officer could believe he was acting in accordance with [a clearly established constitutional right], qualified immunity will not attach.” Pinder v. Johnson, 54 F.3d 1169, 1173 (4th Cir.1995).

    Cited 23 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

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.