Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
6.07s
Grigsby & Assocs., Inc. v. City of Shreveport
294 F. Supp. 3d 529 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Feb 14, 2018
A defendant who can validly raise a qualified immunity defense will enjoy its protection so long as the allegedly violated constitutional right was not clearly established at the time of the violation. See id. … The qualified immunity inquiry turns on "the objective legal reasonableness of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken". Id. at 244, 129 S.Ct. at 822.
Cited 8 timesPublishedLogan v. Sycamore Community School Board of Education
780 F. Supp. 2d 594 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 3, 2011
Qualified Immunity The 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 … cannot violate clearly established constitutional rights as conduct that would “shock the conscience” (doc. 64).
Cited 3 timesPublished849 F.2d 778 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 20, 1988
Defendants’ memorandum of law devoted nine pages to the defense of qualified immunity, arguing that the rights which plaintiff claims were violated were not clearly established in the years 1982-83. … In its only reference to qualified immunity, the court noted in a footnote that a prisoner’s right to have notice of and to comment on charges against him was clearly established prior to 1982, such that qualified immunity
Cited 30 timesPublishedMaropulos v. County of Los Angeles
560 F.3d 974 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 24, 2009
established due process right. … established right.
Cited 15 timesPublishedFarrell Ex Rel. Farrell v. Transylvania County Board of Education
175 N.C. App. 689 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 7, 2006
“Qualified immunity protects public officials from personal liability for performing official, discretionary functions if the conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Assuming arguendo that plaintiffs properly pled its claim for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , plaintiffs’ allegations, nonetheless, fail to establish any conduct by Haehnel that violated clearly established statutory
Cited 14 timesPublished382 F. App'x 7 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 16, 2010
by qualified immunity.” … Here, we move immediately to the second step of the qualified immunity analysis. We therefore consider whether plaintiff’s rights were “clearly established” at the time defendants disciplined Drolett. In Garcetti v.
Cited 4 timesUnpublished299 F.R.D. 527 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 18, 2014
“Even if the government official’s conduct violates a clearly established right, the official is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct was objectively reasonable.” Wallace v. … See Morin, 77 F.3d at 120 (“Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity from suit under § 1983 unless it is shown by specific allegations that the officials violated clearly established law.”); Schultea, 47 F.3d at
Cited 9 timesPublished235 F.3d 1091 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 26, 2000
facts show a violation of clearly established law. … IV. 17 The commissioners would nonetheless be protected by qualified immunity if in early 1998 (the time of their alleged misconduct) it was not clearly established that the speech in which Mr.
Cited 37 timesPublishedMich. Interlock, LLC v. Alcohol Detection Sys., LLC
360 F. Supp. 3d 671 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Dec 27, 2018
Qualified immunity "shield[s]" public officials from money-damages liability if 'their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … In other words, Secretary Johnson is entitled to qualified immunity in her personal capacity because, at the time of the Order, it was not clearly established that she might violate Plaintiffs' constitutional rights.
Cited 4 timesPublishedJimenez v. County of Los Angeles
29 Cal. Rptr. 3d 553 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 2, 2005
were entitled to qualified immunity. … Government employees generally are shielded by qualified immunity “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person
Cited 61 timesPublished228 So. 3d 268 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 2017
Further, the court found that Earl |.Jailed to establish that Sheriff Gusman was not entitled to the application of the doctrines of qualified immunity or force majeure. This appeal follows. … Earl also argues that the trial court erred in applying the doctrine of qualified immunity. Louisiana Revised Statute 9:2798.1, provides in part; B.
Cited 1 timesPublishedMeredith Coleman v. Nyal Frantz, Sheriff of Wells County, Indiana
754 F.2d 719 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 30, 1985
Since Frantz did not violate any then clearly established constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known, he was justified in asserting the qualified immunity defense. … Thiboutot, 448 U.S. 1 , 100 S.Ct. 2502 , 65 L.Ed.2d, 555 ), and that the qualified immunity is unavailable to defendants where the statutory right in such cases is clearly established.
Abrogated in part, on other grounds by William J. Benson v. Robert H. Allphin, 786 F.2d 268 (1986)Cited 120 timesPublishedDerrick Williams v. Michael O'leary, Clyde E. Nash, Leroy Banks
55 F.3d 320 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 25, 1995
Williams challenges both the district court’s implicit finding that Brewer and Kurian were public officials entitled to raise the qualified immunity defense and its explicit conclusion that it was not clearly established … The instant case clearly falls within the class of cases in which qualified immunity may be raised by a private defendant.
Cited 49 timesPublishedJohnson Ex Rel. Johnson v. Salt Lake City Corp.
629 P.2d 432 · Utah Supreme Court · May 1, 1981
We think it evident that a governmental entity’s provision of winter recreation does not qualify for immunity under this test. … Standiford , and is clearly contrary to the new test enunciated in that case and applied in this one.
Cited 23 timesPublishedDarlene M. Kesinger v. Thomas Herrington
381 F.3d 1243 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 26, 2004
Excessive Force & Qualified Immunity The affirmative defense of qualified immunity protects public actors from liability unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … He did not violate the Constitution or any clearly established law. He is entitled to qualified immunity. V.
Cited 260 timesPublished883 F. Supp. 1433 · District Court, D. Nevada · Apr 19, 1995
Angelone’s instant motion for summary judgment argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because the bfoq exception to Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(e)(l), is not clearly established. … Qualified immunity, a hybrid species of affirmative defense and immunity, places the initial burden on the plaintiff to prove that the right allegedly violated was clearly established. 3.
Cited 4 timesPublishedMartel v. TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR
562 F. Supp. 2d 353 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Jun 12, 2008
Qualified Immunity Determination Qualified immunity shields government officials whose conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Thus, a qualified immunity defense is established where “(a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant to believe that his action did not violate
Cited 6 timesPublishedAmity Dimock v. City of Brooklyn Center
124 F.4th 544 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 26, 2024
The right was not “clearly established.” Rivas-Villegas, 595 U.S. at 5. The district court correctly granted qualified immunity on the officers’ warrantless entry. IV. … The right was not “clearly established.” Rivas-Villegas, 595 U.S. at 5. The district court correctly granted qualified immunity on the officers’ use of deadly force.
Cited 9 timesPublished49 F.4th 1132 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 21, 2022
It does not require us to determine whether the defendants violated a “clearly established right” and, as it imposes a higher standard of care, it affords less protection than does qualified immunity. See Baldwin v. … We must still determine whether that right was clearly established.
Cited 11 timesPublished436 F.3d 165 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 6, 2006
is entitled to qualified immunity. … right was clearly established at the time of Sattele’s alleged conduct.
Cited 254 timesPublished
Ask Donna