Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1895

10,000+ results

1.55s

  • Crosby v. Paulk

    187 F.3d 1339 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 10, 1999

    Qualified immunity protects government officials who have acted within their discretionary authority from civil trials and other litigation burdens "if their conduct violates no 'clearly established statutory or constitutional … With these guiding precepts governing entitlement to qualified immunity, we examine the circumstances under which Sheriff Paulk, Commander Winningham, Agent Griffin, and Agent Kendrick acted in view of clearly established

    Cited 94 timesPublished
  • Galvin v. Lloyd

    663 F. Supp. 1572 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Jul 13, 1987

    The relevant language from Mitchell reads: "Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, the defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement … To some extent, the parties have already addressed the substance of the “clearly established” standard in their immunity briefs: the litigants may rely on those briefs if the defendants’ qualified immunity challenge arises

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • McGrath v. Gillis

    44 F.3d 567 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 6, 1995

    “Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” … . *570 In order to defeat a claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must allege a cognizable violation of a constitutional right clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct.

    Cited 51 timesPublished
  • Huron Valley Hospital, Inc. v. City of Pontiac

    792 F.2d 563 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 30, 1986

    This is not a simple conclusion that the law is clearly established as is necessary with qualified immunity. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), test for applying qualified immunity requires a finding that the official conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Whitney v. City of Milan

    677 F.3d 292 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 24, 2012

    Crider appeals the district court’s order which denied his motion for summary judgment on the basis that he violated a clearly established constitutional right, and as such, is not entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity on a Prior-Restraint Claim Government officials are immune from civil liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when performing discretionary duties, provided “their conduct does not violate clearly established

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • Bruce Patrick Samsara v. Sergeant Dale Squires, in His Official Capacity and Individually, and Sergeant Mark Kukuzke, in His Official Capacity and Individually, and City of Fairfield, and Fairfield Police Department

    Court of Appeals of Iowa · Feb 10, 2016

    Qualified immunity operates to immunize police officers from liability where “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known,” and in … Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right. See Saucier, 533 U.S. at 206.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Joseph C. Booker, D/B/A Booker Trucking Company v. City of Atlanta, a Municipal Corporation, F. M. Couvillion

    776 F.2d 272 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 9, 1986

    Even if unintended, such an effect could constitute police “intervention and aid” sufficient to establish state action. See Menchaca, 613 F.2d at 513 ; Jeffries v. … If Couvillion’s actions were within the scope of his official duties, he is immune from suit if he acted under a good faith belief that the actions were legal. See Clark v.

    Cited 39 timesPublished
  • Harris v. Mississippi Valley State Univ.

    873 So. 2d 970 · Mississippi Supreme Court · May 13, 2004

    The test for qualified immunity is two fold, with the threshold question being whether the plaintiff has suffered a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. … Whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity depends on the "objective reasonableness of the action" assessed in light of the legal rules that were "clearly established" at the time it was taken.'

    Cited 103 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
  • James DeLanis v. Metro. Govt of Nashville

    Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 24, 2025

    And it did not violate any clearly established law. … So long as its actions did not violate clearly established law, qualified immunity applies. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 236 (2009).

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Wishnatsky v. Bergquist

    550 N.W.2d 394 · North Dakota Supreme Court · May 29, 1996

    The Court summarized the application of qualified immunity in this context: Our cases establish that qualified immunity shields agents Hunter and Jordan from suit for damages if “a reasonable officer could have believed [ … Bryant’s arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the [arresting] officers possessed.”

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Estep v. Combs

    366 F. Supp. 3d 863 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Aug 2, 2018

    "Unless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery." Mitchell v. … of qualified immunity."

    Cited 23 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
  • Angel v. Cruse

    2014 NV 25 · Nevada Supreme Court · Apr 3, 2014

    established law. . . for qualified immunity purposes." … established law, and Cruse was not entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Martin v. D.C. Metropolitan Police Department

    812 F.2d 1425 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 10, 1987

    (footnotes omitted); Mitchell, 105 S.Ct. at 2816 (defendant entitled to dismissal on qualified immunity plea unless plaintiff states a claim of violation of clearly established law). … The “clearly established law” and “objective reasonableness” facets of current qualified immunity doctrine tug in opposite directions where, as here, the “clearly established law” itself contains a subjective component.

    Overruled on other grounds by Leonard Rollon Crawford-El v. Patricia Britton and the District of Columbia, 93 F.3d 813 (1996)Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Welch v. Daniels

    District Court, D. Nevada · Jun 23, 2025

    immunity test; and (3) the 11 R&R conducted the “clearly established law” prong of the qualified immunity analysis at 12 too high a level of generality. … was clearly established to satisfy the qualified immunity analysis’ second 3 prong.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Watkins v. Mitchem

    50 So. 3d 485 · Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · May 7, 2010

    “An official is entitled to qualified immunity if he is performing discretionary functions and his actions do ‘ “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … ’] complaint fails to allege a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Kincade v. City of Blue Springs

    64 F.3d 389 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 25, 1995

    “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.’ ” Buzek v. … law, cannot be “clearly established.”

    Cited 111 timesPublished
  • Ali v. Oneida County District Attorney

    District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 30, 2023

    “By contrast, prosecutors receive only qualified immunity when performing ‘administrative duties and those investigatory functions that do not relate to an advocate’s preparation for the initiation of a prosecution or for … Kessler, 694 F.3d 161, 166 (2d Cir. 2012) (“ ‘[A]ctions taken as an investigator enjoy only qualified immunity.’ ”) (quoting Zahrey v. Coffey, 221 F.3d 342, 346 (2d Cir. 2000)).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Stoudemire v. Michigan Department of Corrections

    22 F. Supp. 3d 715 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · May 15, 2014

    Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … In evaluating whether a constitutional right was clearly established, “[t]he key determination is whether a defendant moving for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds was on notice that [her] alleged actions were

    Cited 1 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.