Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2012

10,000+ results

4.19s

  • Ogborn v. City of Lancaster

    124 Cal. Rptr. 2d 238 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 22, 2002

    The Individual Defendants Are Entitled to Qualified Governmental Immunity. … This immunity provision bars the Ogborns’ claim for trespassing because the warrant clearly authorized entry onto the Property and into the structures located there.

    Cited 27 timesPublished
  • Davis v. Borough

    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 timesPublished
  • Durr v. Slator

    District 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 timesUnknown
  • Thompson v. Spikes

    663 F. Supp. 627 · District Court, S.D. Georgia · Jun 22, 1987

    to trial, and that entitlement to qualified immunity turns on "the essentially legal question whether the conduct of which the plaintiff complains violated clearly established law.” … been violated are all “clearly established.”

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Tompkins v. Vickers

    26 F.3d 603 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 25, 1994

    Even if the plaintiff's actions are constitutionally protected, public officials are nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity unless the constitutional right asserted was clearly established at the time … Under Harlow, therefore, the focus of an inquiry into a defendant's qualified immunity is ordinarily the "objective reasonableness" of the official's discretionary conduct as measured by reference to clearly established

    Cited 69 timesPublished
  • Hoffer v. Ancel

    176 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 timesPublished
  • J 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 timesPublished
  • Rudley 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 timesPublished
  • Dennis 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 timesPublished
  • Sanchez v. Canales

    574 F.3d 1169 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 30, 2009

    It then considered whether the Officers could “conduct the probation search without suspicion of wrongdoing,” granting immunity because it had not been clearly established “what level of suspicion, if any, was required prior … established one way or another — denied qualified immunity on the detention claim.

    Overruled in part by United States v. King, 687 F.3d 1189 (2012)Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Brazos Transit District v. Lozano

    72 S.W.3d 442 · Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) · Mar 28, 2002

    if the employee is protected by qualified immunity, then so is the governmental entity; and “[t]o that extent, a claim of sovereign immunity may be ‘based on’ an individual’s assertion of qualified immunity and therefore … This cannot fairly be characterized as an assertion of qualified. immunity. Brazos’ attempt to appeal fails under section (5).

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Gudger 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 timesPublished
  • Lamont Warren v. Joseph L. Dwyer, Individually and in His Official Capacity as an Officer in the Police Dept. Of Hartford, Ct

    906 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 timesPublished
  • McCloud v. Testa

    97 F.3d 1536 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 21, 1996

    We also conclude that this proposition is clearly established. … We recognize that our citation to unpublished cases, especially in the qualified immunity context, where the key inquiry is whether a principle of law is clearly established, may be perceived as problematic.

    Cited 119 timesPublished
  • Marriott 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 timesPublished
  • Ruby Hicks v. Doris Scott

    958 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 timesPublished
  • Latits v. Phillips

    298 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 timesPublished
  • Avery v. Davis

    700 F. App'x 949 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 6, 2017

    “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … But “broad general proposition[s]” like that one are not enough to clearly establish the law; instead, the “question is whether the violative nature of particular *953 conduct [was] clearly established.” Mullenix v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Rodriguez v. Panarello

    119 F. Supp. 3d 331 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 10, 2015

    clearly established. … Moreover, to defeat a qualified immunity defense, the right allegedly violated must have been clearly established at the time of the violation.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Farmer, Dee v. Moritsugu, Kenneth

    163 F.3d 610 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 18, 1998

    Analysis A.Qualified Immunity Principles It is well-established that qualified immunity shields gov- ernment officials from liability for civil damages "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Moritsugu is protected by qualified immunity unless Farm- er's allegations could sustain a finding that his conduct violat- ed clearly established law. See Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818.

    Cited 67 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.