Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.69s
669 F. Supp. 2d 532 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 21, 2009
“A government official is entitled to qualified immunity if his ‘conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Berg v. … clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.’ ” Wilson v.
Cited 2 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. New York · Sep 2, 2021
Torreso, 764 F.3d 217, 231 (2d Cir. 2014) ("An officer is not entitled to qualified immunity on the grounds that the law is not clearly established every time a novel method is used to inflict injury"). … "Even if the force is objectively unreasonable, an officer may still be eligible for qualified immunity if it was objectively reasonable for the officer to believe that her action did not violate clearly established law
Cited 0 timesUnknown176 Vt. 630 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Apr 28, 2004
Applying the doctrine of qualified immunity, the trial court granted defendants summary judgment. … Finally, plaintiff argues that qualified immunity does not apply to plaintiffs declaratory judgment claim. See Allen v.
Cited 12 timesPublishedJ W v. Birmingham Bd. of Educ.
904 F.3d 1248 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 24, 2018
Qualified Immunity Analysis In actions brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , the doctrine of qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials whose conduct "does not violate clearly established statutory … Wilson , 311 F.3d 1340 , 1350 (11th Cir. 2002) (recognizing that "fair and clear notice" is the cornerstone of the qualified immunity analysis). There are various ways to evaluate whether a right is clearly established.
Cited 115 timesPublished906 F.2d 70 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 25, 1990
Qualified Immunity We now turn to Warren’s assertion that the defense of qualified immunity should never have been sent to the jury. … Even where the law is “clearly established" and the scope of an official’s permissible conduct is “clearly defined,” the qualified immunity defense also protects an official if it was “objectively reasonable” for him at the
Cited 177 timesPublishedGordon v. District of Columbia
District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 15, 2024
App. 1998)—are not binding, nor do they muddle the clearly established principles set forth above so as to support the District’s claim of qualified immunity. … proving that the defendant “violated clearly established rights” and is not entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesPublishedRudley v. Little Rock Police Dep't
935 F.3d 651 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 3, 2019
The officers are entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to Rudley, establishes a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) the right was clearly established … We reversed the denial of qualified immunity, concluding that no precedent clearly established that Ernst’s takedown was unreasonable at the time of the incident.
Cited 15 timesPublishedDennis Ryno v. City of Waynesville
58 F.4th 995 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 26, 2023
They argued that they were entitled to qualified immunity because Ryno failed to show any Fourth Amendment violation, and even if he did, it was not clearly established. … While the issue of probable cause addresses the first, constitutional-violation prong, “the issue of arguable probable cause is properly part of the resolution of qualified immunity’s second prong, the clearly established
Cited 34 timesPublished250 F. Supp. 3d 709 · District Court, D. Montana · Apr 18, 2017
The Court may begin the qualified immunity analysis by considering first “whether1 theré is a-violation of-clearly established law . without determining whether a constitutional violation occurred.” … The Court also affirmed the magistrate judge’s ruling that the right was clearly established, and, therefore, qualified immunity was not available to the officials. Id.
Cited 0 timesPublishedGudger v. District of Columbia
District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 16, 2015
ANALYSIS Qualified immunity shields “government officials performing discretionary functions . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Gudger’s residence violated clearly established law.
Cited 0 timesPublished958 F.3d 421 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 1, 2020
She further contends that the defendants should be denied qualified immunity because the right to be free from warrantless entry into an apartment was clearly established and there is a genuine dispute of fact as to whether … To that end, “[a]n officer conducting a search is entitled to qualified immunity if ‘a reasonable officer could have believed’ that the search was lawful ‘in light of clearly established law and the information the searching
Cited 57 timesPublishedMarriott v. USD 204, Bonner Springs-Edwardsville
289 F. Supp. 3d 1235 · District Court, D. Kansas · Sep 8, 2017
Defendants further claim that they are entitled to qualified immunity because it is not clearly established that video recording in a public classroom is a violation of constitutional rights. … A defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff can show "(1) a reasonable jury could find facts supporting a violation of a constitutional right, which (2) was clearly established at the time of the defendant's
Cited 2 timesPublished298 Mich. App. 109 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 21, 2012
Therefore, the Court concluded that Brosseau was entitled to qualified immunity under 42 USC 1983 because it was not clearly established that her actions violated the Constitution. Brosseau, 543 US at 201 . … Of course, unlike Brosseau , the case at bar does not involve a claim under § 1983 or issues of qualified immunity. But Brosseau does provide guidance on two points.
Cited 61 timesPublishedRoberts v. Source for Public Data
606 F. Supp. 2d 1042 · District Court, W.D. Missouri · Dec 1, 2008
“Clearly-established” rights are at issue in determining qualified immunity. See discussion of Qualified Immunity, infra. … Qualified Immunity Finally, Davis argues that Plaintiffs’ DPPA claim against him is barred by qualified immunity.
Cited 6 timesPublished147 F. Supp. 3d 249 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 2, 2015
(2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.” … Courts have been instructed “not to define clearly established law at 'a high level of generality.” Id. There is no clearly established law that the alleged conduct here violated the Fourth Amendment.
Cited 29 timesPublishedStrathie v. Department of Transportation of Pennsylvania
547 F. Supp. 1367 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 1, 1982
Thus, under Wood , the immunity defense would be unavailable to defendants if the constitutional rights allegedly infringed by them were clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct, if they knew or should have … that their actions would violate clearly established constitutional rights.
Vacated by Strathie v. Department Of Transportation, 716 F.2d 227 (1983)Cited 11 timesPublishedMassey v. Banning Unified School District
256 F. Supp. 2d 1090 · District Court, C.D. California · Mar 28, 2003
If a violation has been alleged, a defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity if the right was clearly established at the time of the violation. Id. at 200-201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . … In their motion, Defendants focus their qualified immunity argument on the contention that the right to be free of sexual orientation-based discrimination is not clearly established because there is no “closely analogous
Cited 11 timesPublished693 F. Supp. 408 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Aug 11, 1988
Defendants raise the defense of qualified immunity on the grounds that it was not clearly established that the personnel actions taken by the Sheriff would violate the deputies’ constitutional rights. … For the purposes of qualified immunity, it would not have been "clearly established” that the plaintiffs would be entitled to any procedural protections.
Cited 12 timesPublished565 F.3d 721 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 4, 2009
Concluding that these Fourth Amendment principles were clearly established when the incidents occurred, the court denied qualified immunity. Marcantel and Hix now appeal. … City of Las Cruces, 523 F.3d 1205, 1211-12 (10th Cir.2008) (“[T]he clearly established weight of authority from other courts” establishes a right for the purposes of qualified immunity.).
Cited 61 timesPublished63 F.3d 71 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Aug 23, 1995
Thus, the doctrine of qualified immunity limits a plaintiff's damages against state actors "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … The meaning of the adjectival phrase "clearly 4 established," as it operates in the qualified immunity arena, has not always been clearly established.
Cited 95 timesPublished
Ask Donna