Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

10,000+ results

0.71s

  • 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 … We recognize that our citation to unpublished cases, especially in the qualified immunity context, where the key inquiry is whether a principle of law is clearly established, may be perceived as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
  • Moyler v. Fannin

    District Court, W.D. Virginia · Mar 16, 2023

    Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages, provided that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights within the knowledge of a … Fulford, 987 F.3d 299, 311 (4th Cir. 2021) (“The burden of establishing a qualified immunity defense rests on the official asserting the defense.”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Triad Associates, Inc., D/B/A Guardian Security, Jk Guardian Security Services, Inc., and K & J Management, Inc. v. Renault Robinson

    10 F.3d 492 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 24, 1993

    and (2) were the constitutional standards clearly established at the time in question?”). … The defendant asserted that he should be entitled to qualified immunity, arguing that at the time of his conduct the law failed to clearly establish that a judge’s absolute immunity does not extend to hiring and firing decisions

    Cited 99 timesPublished
  • Mathis v. Bess

    763 F. Supp. 58 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 14, 1991

    The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials sued in their personal capacities from liability for discretionary acts provided their conduct did not violate any “clearly established” federal statutory or … Benjamin, a single unpublished decision of a lower court, “clearly established” the law of this circuit for purposes of qualified immunity. See Hawkins v. Steingut, 829 F.2d 317, 321 (2d Cir.1987).

    Modified on other grounds by Mathis v. Bess, 767 F. Supp. 558 (1991)Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Shehee v. Luttrell

    199 F.3d 295 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 1, 1999

    immunity, finding that the law regarding Shehee’s First Amendment and Fifth Amendment claims was clearly established. … of clearly established law.”

    Cited 1,686 timesPublished
  • Moran v. Washington

    147 F.3d 839 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 2, 1998

    established” to defeat Senn’s assertion of qualified immunity. … established to defeat qualified immunity. .

    Cited 86 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
  • Johnson v. Pearson

    316 F. Supp. 2d 307 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Mar 1, 2004

    Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages in a § 1983 action “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … If Plaintiffs rights were not clearly established, “the qualified immunity doctrine still provides a defendant officer with immunity from suit.” Jones, 325 F.3d at 526-527 .

    Cited 11 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
  • Blake v. Wright

    179 F.3d 1002 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 15, 1999

    Alternatively, the majority opinion may imply that the district court in Mitchell could not reach the qualified immunity question because the law with respect to Title III was clearly established, not because qualified immunity … We fail to see the logic of providing a defense of qualified immunity to protect public officials from personal liability when they violate constitutional rights that are not clearly established and deny them qualified immunity

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Howze v. Virginia Polytechnic

    901 F. Supp. 1091 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Jul 12, 1995

    Government officials exercising discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity if the officer’s conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … For qualified immunity purposes, however, the record is sufficient to hold that, even if the speech is ultimately decided to be protected, that right was not clearly established in 1992 and 1993.

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Flick v. Larue

    608 F. Supp. 1281 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · May 20, 1985

    established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would be aware, that official can defeat a constitutional tort claim by interposing the qualified immunity defense. … unless the constitutional right he was alleged to have violated was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.”

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Cheyenne Johnson v. Mount Pleasant Pub. Schs.

    Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 30, 2025

    So, unless Johnson has stated a legally viable claim of a violation of a clearly established right, with supporting precedent, Russell is entitled to qualified immunity. … He did not raise a “clearly established” argument at all, nor did he argue any aspect of qualified immunity based on X.M.’s facts.

    Cited 0 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
  • D'AGUANNO v. Gallagher

    827 F. Supp. 1558 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 9, 1993

    Qualified Immunity Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from civil damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Thus, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from suit on Count III because they did not violate clearly established law. 4. The Right to Equal Protection Under the Law.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Archer v. Chisholm

    191 F. Supp. 3d 932 · District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · May 26, 2016

    She is entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the plaintiff plausibly pleads that she violated a constitutional right, and (2) the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … Qualified immunity—validity of warrant Turning to qualified immunity, again, to overcome qualified immunity the plaintiff must plausibly allege that the defendants violated a constitutional right, and that the right was clearly

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Jackson v. Texas Southern University

    997 F. Supp. 2d 613 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 3, 2014

    “The ‘clearly established’ standard does not mean that official’s conduct is protected by qualified immunity unless ‘the very action in question has previously been held unlawful.’ ” Kinney v. … The officer is “entitled to qualified immunity if his or her conduct was objectively reasonable in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time of his or her actions,” even if the conduct violated the

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • Delores Escobar, Individually, as Representative of the Estate of Luis Manuel Escobar, and as Next Friend of Luis Alberto Escobar, a Minor v. Harris County, Texas and Eric Goodney

    Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Jul 31, 2014

    Clearly established law and qualified immunity After Deputy Goodney raised the affirmative defense of qualified immunity, the burden of persuasion fell on Escobar to negate the defense. … If he did, then the clearly established law permits the use of deadly force. If he didn’t, then the clearly established law prohibits it.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Chiu v. Plano Independent School District

    339 F.3d 273 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 16, 2003

    However, the qualified immunity doctrine only protects officials “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Objective Reasonableness Although Davis and Criswell violated Kirke and Johnson’s clearly established rights, they are nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity if they can show that their actions were objectively

    Cited 37 timesPublished
  • Morinville v. Old Colony Cooperative Bank

    579 F. Supp. 1498 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Feb 10, 1984

    conduct not previously identified as unlawful____ If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct. … the rule could be deemed to not have been clearly established.

    Cited 2 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.