Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.75s
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 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 timesPublishedWanamaker v. Westport Board of Education
899 F. Supp. 2d 193 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Sep 25, 2012
Qualified immunity “protects .government officials from liability where the officials’ conduct was not in violation of a ‘clearly established’ constitutional right.” Sudler v. … by qualified immunity.”
Cited 28 timesPublished101 F.3d 1151 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 9, 1996
Dickerson were objectively unreasonable in light of the clearly established law regarding the knock and announce rule and its exceptions." … because they did not violate Dickerson's clearly established constitutional right to be free from excessive force.
Cited 152 timesPublished2022 NY Slip Op 07288 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 22, 2022
In the federal context, public officials may invoke qualified immunity under 42 USC § 1983 "unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established … Given this framework, we begin with Tierney's claim of qualified immunity.
Cited 7 timesPublishedWilliam Thomas Meloy v. Kathy Bachmeier Dr. Bernard J. O'Neill
302 F.3d 845 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 11, 2002
Thus, we proceed to the second qualified immunity question: whether the right was clearly established. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . … Because the law was not clearly established that Ba-chmeier was deliberately indifferent to Meloy’s serious medical needs, Bachmeier is entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 101 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 18, 2020
Qualified Immunity “Government officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … For these reasons, qualified immunity is denied on this claim. IV.
Cited 0 timesUnknownMoore, William v. Hartman, Michael
388 F.3d 871 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 9, 2004
TATEL, Circuit Judge: Qualified immunity generally shields public officials from civil damages ‘‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Accordingly, Moore has alleged the violation of a constitutional right, precluding summary judgment under the first element of the qualified immunity test. Was the Law Clearly Established?
Cited 23 timesPublished607 F.3d 992 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 5, 2010
If the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right, then qualified immunity is not applicable. … Nonetheless, the district court granted the defendants qualified immunity because it found that Lockett did not satisfy the second prong, which requires that the constitutional right was clearly established.
Cited 53 timesPublished641 F. Supp. 547 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 7, 1986
But in any event, all his actions in his official capacity are protected by the qualified (or good faith) immunity which bars a damage action against him unless his conduct “violate[d] clearly established statutory or constitutional … But in any case, my ruling on the question of immunity does not turn on the correctness of Justice Sayah’s ruling. The question is rather whether there was “clearly established” law upholding Barr’s position.
Cited 7 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 timesPublishedJohn Steven Thomas Olinger v. Dennis J. Larson City of Sioux of South Dakota Falls Terry Satterlee
134 F.3d 1362 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 4, 1998
The district court dismissed Olinger’s entire action based upon a finding of qualified immunity for the arresting and supervising officers. Olinger timely appealed. We affirm. I. … The district court initially entered an order granting in part defendants’ motion for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity.
Cited 24 timesPublishedYitzchak Simon v. Tishaura Jones
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 13, 2026
Mayor Jones and Director Scoggin moved for summary judgment, invoking qualified and official immunity. … The court should then “determine if those facts demonstrate a constitutional violation that is clearly established.” Id. “[C]learly established law must be ‘particularized’ to the facts of the case . . . .” Boudoin v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 9, 2026
However, bound by our qualified immunity precedent, we affirm the district court on the basis that there is no clearly established law. I. … In particular, plaintiffs “must rebut the [qualified immunity] defense by establishing a genuine fact issue as to whether the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law.”
Cited 0 timesPublished355 F.3d 333 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 18, 2003
Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity when “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … However, the test for qualified immunity is whether the Appellees have asserted the deprivation of a statutory right under clearly established law.
Cited 74 timesPublished581 F.3d 1304 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 31, 2009
DISCUSSION “Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from suits in their individual capacities unless their conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional … “To overcome qualified immunity, the plaintiff must satisfy a two prong test; he must show that: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) this right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation
Cited 52 timesPublished176 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 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jul 20, 2020
established law and is entitled to qualified immunity. 3 C. … has established a violation of his First Amendment rights, 20 defendant is entitled to qualified immunity because plaintiff’s alleged free speech rights were not 21 clearly established at the time of the May 21, 2017
Cited 0 timesUnknownAngie Waller v. City of Fort Worth Texas, e
922 F.3d 590 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 24, 2019
These acts, the district court explained, violated the plaintiffs’ clearly established rights to access the courts. … “clearly established” at the time of the challenged conduct.’”
Cited 184 timesPublished630 F.3d 677 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 14, 2011
- eral right at issue was clearly established at the time that the alleged violation occurred. … III As we mentioned, Officers Clark and Kaminski are entitled to immunity if their conduct did not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a rea- sonable person would have known.
Cited 79 timesPublished
Ask Donna