Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2016

10,000+ results

9.29s

  • Gardetto v. Mason

    854 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 timesPublished
  • Edmiston v. Borrego

    75 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 timesPublished
  • Kosta v. Connolly

    709 F. Supp. 592 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 15, 1989

    Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity for their actions taken against plaintiffs. In Harlow v. … Gable, 823 F.2d 723, 733 (3d Cir.1987) (defendants not entitled to qualified immunity where law clearly established that a public employee could not be demoted in retaliation for exercising his First Amendment rights).

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • England v. Hendricks

    880 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 timesPublished
  • Heidemann v. Rother

    84 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 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
  • Paul Romero v. Damon Fay, Bob Stover, Chief of Police, and Albuquerque, City of John Doe, Albuquerque Police Officers

    45 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 timesPublished
  • Monroe 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 timesPublished
  • MacIas 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 timesPublished
  • Outlaw v. City of Meriden

    43 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 timesPublished
  • Soto v. Bautista

    Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 24, 2023

    Clearly Established Law We now turn to the second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry. … Notwithstanding the prior analysis, Zuniga and Bautista are still “entitled to qualified immunity unless” Soto demonstrated that the right in question was “clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Chadha 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 timesPublished
  • Rasche v. Berman

    491 S.W.3d 182 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · May 20, 2016

    The court held that the Appel-lees were immune from Rasche’s claim that they negligently failed to cancel school, reasoning that the decision whether to close Jefferson County Public Schools is clearly an act involving the … Qualified official immunity is an affirmative defense that must be specifically pled. Gomez v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection v. Drema Dotson

    West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 16, 2021

    The circuit court stated that “[i]f Plaintiffs can prove their case, the WV DEP’s enforcement actions violated clearly established law and qualified immunity would not apply. … immunity pursuant to our well-established law.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Lybrook 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 timesPublished
  • SCHROEDER v. DeKALB COUNTY Et Al.

    341 Ga. App. 748 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jun 14, 2017

    Qualified immunity protects officials performing discretionary functions from individual claims brought pursuant to 42 USC § 1983, if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … were clearly established at the time the action was taken.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Nat'l Rifle Ass'n of Am. v. Vullo

    Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 17, 2025

    Vullo argues that she is entitled to qualified immunity, but the NRA maintains that she violated clearly established law prohibiting coercion or retaliation violative of the First Amendment. … But under the qualified immunity analysis, general pronouncements of law are not sufficient to "clearly establish" a right.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Barnes v. Furman

    629 F. App'x 52 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 22, 2015

    Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability for civil damages “if his conduct did not violate plaintiffs clearly established rights or if it would have been objectively reasonable for the official to believe … Defendants do not dispute that the confiscation of Barnes’s Tsalot-Kob religious head covering was unlawful and instead argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because there is no clearly established law permitting

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Gonzalez-Perez v. Davila

    680 F. Supp. 2d 347 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jun 8, 2009

    The defense of qualified immunity protects an official who violated the plaintiffs federally protected right as long as the official did not violate clearly established federal law at the time he acted. Harlow v. … The “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity defense for a supervisor is satisfied “when (1) the subordinate’s actions violated a clearly established constitutional right, and (2) it was clearly established that

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • City Union Mission, Inc. v. Mike Sharp

    36 F.4th 810 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 10, 2022

    The district court granted summary judgment, resolving its qualified immunity analysis on the clearly established prong and finding that Sheriff Sharp was entitled to qualified immunity. See R. Doc. 135, at 5. … established at the time of the infraction, the defendant-officer is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 6 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.