Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.26s
270 F. Supp. 2d 865 · District Court, S.D. Texas · May 30, 2003
The Court first determines whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. If not, the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. … Because Flores has alleged violations of clearly established law, the Court moves to the next step in the qualified immunity analysis: judging the reasonableness of the alleged behavior. See Hayter, 154 F.3d at 274 .
Cited 1 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 27, 2023
An officer is entitled to qualified immunity “if there is no violation, or if the conduct did not violate law clearly established at the time.” Id. … Nov. 16, 2022) (rejecting the qualified immunity defense regarding clearly established law for § 1983 malicious prosecution claims); Crider v. Williams, No. 21-13797, 2022 WL 3867541, at *8 (11th Cir.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished900 S.W.2d 874 · Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Jun 22, 1995
We address the trial court’s denial of summary judgment of the deputies’ qualified immunity defense and the County’s sovereign immunity defense based on the deputies’ qualified immunity claim. … "Qualified immunity” is one of several interchangeable terms (including “quasi-judicial immunity," "discretionary immunity,” "official immunity,” and "good faith immunity”) used to refer to an affirmative defense available
Cited 26 timesPublishedJaQuan Bradford v. Ilona Avery
855 F.3d 890 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 1, 2017
The district court decided that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because Bradford could "not prove and has not produced any evidence that defendants should have been aware of a breach of a clearly established … A government official is entitled to qualified immunity from personal liability unless "the facts shown by the plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional or statutory right" and "that right was clearly established
Cited 6 timesPublishedBingham v. City of Manhattan Beach
329 F.3d 723 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 19, 2003
He posits a novel twist to the “clearly established” inquiry, contending that because it is not clearly established that damages may be obtained under § 1983 for an unlawful traffic stop, qualified immunity should apply. … Rather, in determining whether qualified immunity is available, those cases merely inquire whether the right at issue was clearly established in law.
Cited 14 timesPublishedStoudemire 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 timesPublished550 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 timesPublished933 F.3d 481 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 8, 2019
They also argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because the “nebulous” rights on which the plaintiffs rely are not clearly established, nor were their actions objectively unreasonable. … Ashcroft-Smith, 922 F.3d 320, 322 n.1 (5th Cir. 2019), they cannot be the source of clearly established law for qualified immunity analysis.
Cited 41 timesPublished311 F. Supp. 2d 1307 · District Court, D. Utah · Mar 26, 2004
At the same time, however, “where the right is clearly established, a defendant should only ‘rarely’ be able to succeed with a qualified immunity defense.” … was “clearly established.”
Cited 2 timesPublishedGregory Samples v. Harris County
900 F.3d 655 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 17, 2018
Our legal inquiry into the availability of qualified immunity fits into a two-step framework. … marshal caselaw asserting to resolve the question of clearly established law.
Cited 27 timesPublished770 F.3d 97 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 6, 2014
[and] [t]he second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was clearly established at the time of the violation.” … established rights,” precluding a grant of qualified immunity. 85 F.3d at 67 .
Questioned by Kisembo v. NYS Office of Children & Family Servs., 285 F. Supp. 3d 509 (2018)Cited 434 timesPublished665 F.3d 1063 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 8, 2011
FINN 20857 sonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). … [2] The only remaining question is whether the federal law that the Court of Appeal failed to apply reasonably was clearly established by the Supreme Court at the time of the Court of Appeal’s decision, as AEDPA requires
Cited 43 timesPublishedArkansas Attorney General Reports · Jan 7, 1993
The court framed the qualified immunity issue as being "whether minor school children suspected of being victims of child abuse had, [at the relevant time] a clearly established right to be free from questioning and visual … The court found no such clearly established right, and found, therefore that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity and were therefore not liable.
Cited 0 timesPublished480 F. Supp. 2d 1271 · District Court, D. Kansas · Mar 29, 2007
No Clearly Established Law Even if Mr. … Hunt had established a constitutional violation sufficient to overcome the first prong of qualified immunity, he has not shown that the right was clearly established at the time he was placed in administrative segregation
Cited 3 timesPublished191 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 timesPublished860 F.2d 1199 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 2, 1988
violated clearly established law. … clearly established duty towards plaintiff.
Cited 49 timesPublishedJones v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department
873 F.3d 1123 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 20, 2017
Clearly Established Law - Because defendants may have committed constitutional violations, we turn to the second element of' qualified immunity: whether there was clearly established law. Defendants rely on Brooks v. … qualified immunity).
Cited 85 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. California · Nov 19, 2021
See Shafer, 868 F.3d at 1117 (holding that 2 qualified immunity applies if no clearly established law exists on the issue); see also White v. Pauly, 137 S. … City of Santa Maria, 915 F.3d 12 592, 603 (9th Cir. 2019) (“[O]ur qualified immunity determination with respect to Officer Brice rests 13 solely on the ‘clearly established’ law prong; we do not reach the question of whether
Cited 0 timesUnknownKvech v. New Mexico Department of Public Safety
987 F. Supp. 2d 1162 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Nov 30, 2013
established prong of the qualified immunity analysis. … Clearly Established Rights in the Qualified Immunity Analysis.
Cited 4 timesPublishedMcCullough Ex Rel. McCullough v. Antolini
559 F.3d 1201 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 26, 2009
The Supreme Court recently reaffirmed the long-established standard for qualified immunity in Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. _, No. 07-751 (Jan. 21, 2009). … , and, second, that it was clearly established at the time of the incident that the actions of the defendant were unconstitutional.
Cited 188 timesPublished
Ask Donna