Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2012

10,000+ results

3.15s

  • Elvan Moore v. Kevin Pederson

    806 F.3d 1036 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 15, 2015

    But because the law on these points was not clearly established in this Circuit before our decision today, we affirm the district court’s entry of summary judgment *1040 on qualified-immunity grounds to Peder-son. … In pursuit of that aim, qualified immunity protects government officials engaged in discretionary functions and sued in their individual capacities unless they violate “clearly established federal statutory or constitutional

    Cited 86 timesPublished
  • Lewis v. Guerrero

    978 S.W.2d 689 · Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Nov 5, 1998

    Qualified immunity may thus be properly invoked to protect “government officials performing discretionary functions to the extent their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Nevertheless, we stated he did not prove his defense of qualified immunity because he did not establish the “good faith element.” 6 Guerrero, 946 S.W.2d at 573 .

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Gold v. City of Miami

    121 F.3d 1442 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 17, 1997

    Discussion Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil litigation and damage liability where "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … At the time, no cases clearly established that those actions did not constitute legally proscribed disorderly conduct.

    Cited 146 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
  • Egolf v. Witmer

    526 F.3d 104 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 22, 2008

    The court granted immunity on the basis that the constitutional rights were not “clearly established” in the circumstances of this case. This appeal followed. … Qualified immunity turns on the “objective legal reasonableness of the action ... assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time.” Anderson v.

    Cited 37 timesPublished
  • Harris v. Dugger

    757 F. Supp. 1359 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 2, 1991

    Qualified Immunity The Court next must consider the magistrate’s recommendation on the defendants’ claim of qualified immunity. … A determination of whether an official violated clearly established law itself requires the Court to make two inquiries. First, the Court must ascertain the law that was “clearly established.”

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Drake v. Scott

    812 F.2d 395 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 20, 1987

    defendant state officials had violated clearly established rights to free speech. … In addition, in the present case the question of qualified immunity itself depends in large part on whether defendants knew or should have known that Drake had a clearly established property interest in the job at the time

    Modified on other grounds by Drake v. Scott, 823 F.2d 239 (1987)Cited 92 timesPublished
  • Palmieri v. Clark County

    Court of Appeals of Nevada · Dec 31, 2015

    Ct. 305, 308 (2015) ("The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established .. … A searching officer 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

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Barnes v. LAPORTE COUNTY

    621 F. Supp. 2d 642 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 7, 2008

    In determining whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, a plaintiff must first allege the deprivation of an actual constitutional right that is clearly established. Doyle v. … Shuter may or may not be entitled to qualified immunity, but Shuter has failed to adequately establish that qualified immunity exists as a basis for dismissal. 4 Shuter’s motion to dismiss is DENIED. [Doc. No. 18.].

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Kinney v. Weaver

    367 F.3d 337 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 24, 2002

    Not long after Harlow , the Court refined the qualified immunity standard by defining “clearly established” in a way that encompasses the “objective reasonableness” inquiry: To be “clearly established” for purposes of qualified … Yet, at the same time, an official does not lose qualified immunity merely because a certain right is clearly established in the abstract.

    Cited 222 timesPublished
  • Donna L. Todd v. United States of America and R.S. Wintrode, Jr., District Director, Internal Revenue Service

    849 F.2d 365 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 10, 1988

    Accordingly, we confine this analysis to the qualified immunity issue. Ill Defendants’ assertion of qualified immunity presents a question of law. Mitchell v. … In such a case the defendant will be immune from suit. On the other hand, if a defendant has violated clearly established law, he will generally be liable.

    Cited 63 timesPublished
  • Peak Alarm Co., Inc. v. Salt Lake City Corp.

    654 Utah Adv. Rep. 4 · Utah Supreme Court · Apr 16, 2010

    The doctrine of qualified immunity operates by insulating government employees "from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … Howe's right to be free from unreasonable seizure was clearly established at the time of the alleged unlawful conduct.

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Marine Maria Quives v. Rick Campbell and Jedd Blessing

    934 F.2d 668 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 1, 1991

    The court held that the defendants are entitled to. qualified immunity because “Campbell and other state officials could not reasonably be charged with knowledge that they might be violatr ing a clearly established right … the constitutional issues,” “[e]oncluding that the asserted federal statutory rights were clearly and particularly established at the time of the alleged wrongs....”

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • Jean-Gabriel Bernier v. Jeff Allen

    38 F.4th 1145 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 5, 2022

    Allen’s decision violated no clearly established Eighth Amendment right, we hold that the doctor is entitled to qualified immunity from Bernier’s damages claim. … Nevertheless, the majority rests its conclusion on the clearly established prong of qualified immunity.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Jordan v. Fox, Rothschild, O'Brien & Frankel

    787 F. Supp. 471 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 27, 1992

    Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806, 2815 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) (“Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal … Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. at 2738 . 12 In determining whether a constitutional right is clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity, a court must determine whether the contours of the right at the time

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Falyn Bruce v. Derek Guernsey

    777 F.3d 872 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 26, 2015

    Qualified immunity is available when a defendant’s conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitu- No. 14-1352 13  tional rights of which a reasonable … Thus, even when an officer lacks probable cause, he is still entitled to qualified immunity when a reasonable officer “could have reasonably believed that probable cause existed in light of well- established law.” Id.

    Cited 33 timesPublished
  • Rivera-Jimenez v. Pierluisi

    362 F.3d 87 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Mar 29, 2004

    Qualified Immunity "Denials of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds are reviewed to the extent that the qualified immunity defense turns upon a purely legal question and any disputed … We turn now to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis. "The question of whether a right is clearly established is an issue of law for the court to decide."

    Cited 45 timesPublished
  • Kingsmill v. Szewczak

    117 F. Supp. 3d 657 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 30, 2015

    Qualiñed Immunity Officer Szewczak argues' that he is entitled to qualified immunity because “it was not clearly established oh February 9, 2014, that calling a person over to a patrol car and failing to warn that person … Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages to the extent that their conduct did not violate clearly-established constitutional rights of which a reasonable officer would have known.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Ermini v. Scott

    249 F. Supp. 3d 1253 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 6, 2017

    Even if shooting plaintiff was a violation of the Fourth Amendment, Deputy Hamer is entitled to qualified immunity unless plaintiff establishes that Deputy Hamer violated a constitutional right that was “clearly established … The Fourth Amendment right was not clearly established in the specific context of this case. Therefore, even if plaintiffs Fourth Amendment right was violated, Deputy Hamer is entitled to qualified immunity. D.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Wettersten v. Chillicothe City School District Board of Education

    District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 27, 2022

    Kammer, 955 F.3d 520, 540–41 (6th Cir. 2020) (holding parents’ right to make decisions concerning the care and custody of their children without government interference was clearly established). … City of New York, 775 F.3d 538 (2d Cir. 2015) (affirming decision that state statute and regulation excluding children not immunized from school during disease outbreak was constitutional despite parental objection).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

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.