Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
3.73s
621 F. Supp. 2d 1300 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Dec 15, 2008
DISCUSSION Defendant argues that Plaintiff failed to produce sufficient evidence at trial to defeat Defendant’s entitlement to qualified immunity and that it was not “clearly established” that her conduct violated Plaintiffs … For purposes of qualified immunity, the Eleventh Circuit has identified three sources of “clearly established” law.
Cited 1 timesPublished299 F.R.D. 527 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 18, 2014
“Even if the government official’s conduct violates a clearly established right, the official is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct was objectively reasonable.” Wallace v. … See Morin, 77 F.3d at 120 (“Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity from suit under § 1983 unless it is shown by specific allegations that the officials violated clearly established law.”); Schultea, 47 F.3d at
Cited 9 timesPublishedAnthony Gant v. Daniel Hartman
924 F.3d 445 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 14, 2019
Benner, 913 F.3d 640, 643 (7th Cir. 2019) (affirming denial of qualified immunity). … Officer Hartman claims that he is entitled to qualified im- munity because his actions did not violate Gant’s constitu- tional rights and, even if they did, those rights were not clearly established on or before August 23,
Cited 41 timesPublished854 F. Supp. 1520 · District Court, D. Wyoming · Jun 7, 1994
immunity, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant’s actions violated clearly established rights. … Finally, the Court also finds that this corpus of law was certainly clearly established at the time of the events in question such that the motion for qualified immunity on this claim must also be denied. iii.
Cited 13 timesPublishedAcevedo-Garcia v. Vera-Monroig
204 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 17, 2000
work conditions and responsibilities was "clearly established." … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818-19 (1982) ("If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail . . . .").
Cited 143 timesPublishedJames Boyd v. Mickey Owen and Leslie Foott
481 F.3d 520 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 22, 2007
That does not end the inquiry, however, because qualified immunity nevertheless protects the defendants unless the constitutional right that was violated was clearly established. … He has failed to meet his burden of demonstrating that the constitutional violation was clearly established, and the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 46 timesPublished75 F.4th 551 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 1, 2023
“Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established [statutory or] constitutional right.” Converse v. … Regarding the second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis, for a right to be “clearly established” it must be “sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates
Cited 33 timesPublished880 F.2d 281 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 21, 1989
On the facts before us, then, Hendricks and Groll would be entitled to qualified immunity if it was not clearly established under Utah law at the time of their actions that a store owner could not be charged under the aiding … Since the decision to charge did not violate clearly established law at the time of the officers’ actions, they are immune from suit.
Cited 45 timesPublished581 F. App'x 580 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 5, 2014
Qualified immunity “protects government officials from suit for damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.” Pearson v. … Courts may address the two prongs of qualified immunity in either order. Pearson, 555 U.S. at 236 , 129 S.Ct. 808 .
Cited 5 timesPublished84 F.3d 1021 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 23, 1996
For reversal, all of the defendants, including Joy, argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law because plaintiffs have failed to allege a violation of any clearly established constitutional or federal … In Behrens , the defendant, an official with the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, had moved for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, arguing that his actions had not violated any clearly established right.
Cited 78 timesPublished45 F.3d 1472 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 25, 1995
In his response, Plaintiff asserted that Defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity because they had violated clearly established law of which a reasonable police officer would have known. … Specifically, Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity on all of Plaintiffs claims because Plaintiff failed to show that: (1) Defendants arrested Plaintiff without probable cause; (2) clearly established law
Cited 316 timesPublishedRussell v. City of Tupelo, Mississippi
District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Jun 16, 2021
Clifton, 29 F.3d 1012 (5th Cir. 1994) (holding that law enforcement officers are entitled to qualified immunity “unless it is shown that, at the time of the incident, [the officer] violated a clearly established constitutional … An officer may successfully invoke the defense of qualified immunity “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”
Cited 0 timesUnknown43 Conn. App. 387 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Oct 1, 1996
“The Supreme Court has expressly encouraged the use of summary judgment when qualified immunity is raised as a defense. … “As a general rule, police officers are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe their acts did
Cited 47 timesPublished49 F.4th 1132 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 21, 2022
It does not require us to determine whether the defendants violated a “clearly established right” and, as it imposes a higher standard of care, it affords less protection than does qualified immunity. See Baldwin v. … We must still determine whether that right was clearly established.
Cited 11 timesPublishedMacIas v. County of Los Angeles
50 Cal. Rptr. 3d 364 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 27, 2006
violation, the right was not clearly established. … immunity because the right at issue was not clearly established).
Cited 2 timesPublishedMonroe Ex Rel. C.B.D. v. McNairy County
520 F. Supp. 2d 917 · District Court, W.D. Tennessee · Nov 6, 2007
When the defense of qualified immunity is raised, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the “contours” of the constitutionally right allegedly violated were sufficiently clear, at the time of the alleged violation … Bryant, 502 U.S. 224 , 112 S.Ct. 534 , 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991)) (Qualified immunity shields police officers from suit if a reasonable officer could have believed the plaintiffs arrest to be lawful, in light of clearly established
Cited 5 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 timesUnknownLybrook v. Members of the Farmington Municipal Schools Board of Education
232 F.3d 1334 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 27, 2000
When qualified immunity is raised in a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion, the plaintiff must carry the burden of establishing that the defendant violated clearly established law. Breidenbach v. … We held that Schuler’s free speech right under the First Amendment was sufficiently established that qualified immunity was not available.
Cited 87 timesPublishedChadha v. Charlotte Hungerford Hospital
77 Conn. App. 104 · Connecticut Appellate Court · May 27, 2003
, the qualified immunity provided by §§ 19a-20 and 19a-17b and the absolute immunity provided by the common law are concurrent; that is, that “where both an absolute and qualified immunity apply, the absolute immunity trumps … judgment on the basis of qualified immunity.
Cited 6 timesPublished990 F. Supp. 2d 695 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 31, 2013
immunity analysis and asks whether, nevertheless, qualified immunity is appropriate because the Officer Defendants’ actions were objectively reasonable “in light of clearly established law at the time of the conduct in question … As already stated, qualified immunity is a defense available to public officials performing discretionary functions “... insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of
Cited 6 timesPublished
Ask Donna