Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1980

10,000+ results

4.89s

  • Lloyd v. Birkman

    127 F. Supp. 3d 725 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Sep 2, 2015

    Eeds, 392 F.3d 138, 147 (5th Cir.2004) (denying qualified immunity because it was clearly established that “Reporting serious police misconduct or corruption” was protected First Amendment activity); Izen v. … qualified immunity.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Harry A. Bendiburg, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Carl Bendiburg, Deceased v. Pamela S. Dempsey

    19 F.3d 557 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 21, 1994

    The court did not use the term “qualified immunity,” nor did it suggest that the law was not clearly established. Furthermore, the court submitted a special interrogatory to the jury. … The law, as established by the Anderson case in the Supreme Court, is that qualified immunity — inquiry for the qualified immunity is whether the objective, albeit, fact-specific question, whether a reasonable official could

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Duckett v. City of Cedar Park, Texas

    950 F.2d 272 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 10, 1992

    The Supreme Court held that the first inquiry in the examination of a defendant's claim of qualified immunity is whether the plaintiff "allege[d] the violation of a clearly established constitutional right." … . § 1983 , holding that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because defendants "could not reasonably be charged with knowledge that they might be violating a clearly established right of the Plaintiff."

    Cited 72 timesPublished
  • Defore v. Premore

    863 F. Supp. 91 · District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 6, 1994

    Government officials pérforming discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity provided their “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … Accordingly, defendants argue that they did not violate plaintiffs’ “clearly established” rights and thus are entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Cummerlander v. Patriot Preparatory Academy Inc.

    86 F. Supp. 3d 808 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 9, 2015

    ’ argument that Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … In the context of school search and seizure, the Supreme Court in Safford set forth the standard for a clearly established law: A school official searching a student is entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Beatrice Luna v. Texas Department of Pub Sf

    765 F.3d 531 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 28, 2014

    Discussion The doctrine of qualified immunity shields “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … Clearly Established Law Under the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, plaintiffs must show that Mullenix’s actions violated a constitutional right that was sufficiently clearly established.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Price v. Kelly

    847 F. Supp. 163 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 24, 1994

    The Supreme Court established the current qualified immunity analysis in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). … As discussed, the second half of the two-part qualified immunity analysis focuses on whether or not the constitutional rights were clearly established at the time of the violation, such that defendants knew or should have

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Perez-Olivo v. Gonzalez

    384 F. Supp. 2d 536 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Aug 26, 2005

    The first prong of this test establishes that the qualified immunity defense provides government officials with a shield from liability “for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … After finding that there is a clearly established right, the second prong of the qualified immunity test examines the reasonableness of the defendant’s conduct in light of clearly established federal law. Malley v.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Wanamaker v. Westport Board of Education

    899 F. Supp. 2d 193 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Sep 25, 2012

    Qualified immunity “protects .government officials from liability where the officials’ conduct was not in violation of a ‘clearly established’ constitutional right.” Sudler v. … by qualified immunity.”

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • Trey Sims v. Kenneth Labowitz

    885 F.3d 254 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Mar 14, 2018

    The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional or other rights that a reasonable officer would have … clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

    Cited 74 timesPublished
  • Raymond Kelley v. Chad Pruett

    Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 8, 2026

    or statutory right; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.’” … Stopping there, the district court also did not consider the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity analysis.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Cutino v. Untch

    79 F. Supp. 3d 1305 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 14, 2015

    Qualified Immunity Standards 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 … In this respect, qualified immunity “ ‘gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments.’ ” Carroll v.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Harris County, Texas G. Young D. Gehring and J. Cavitt v. Shirley Nagel, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Joel Don Casey

    Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Aug 25, 2011

    Identification of the clearly established law is not a question of fact to be established by evidence. … This would not be qualified immunity, but absolute immunity.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Archer v. Chisholm

    188 F. Supp. 3d 866 · 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 1 timesPublished
  • Thomas Wilkinson, Benjamin Wilkinson, by Next Friend Thomas Wilkinson and Jonathan Wiegand v. Caroline S. Russell, James Adams and Gerald Jeffords

    182 F.3d 89 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 17, 1999

    Under the Vermont qualified immunity standard, then, Russell is entitled to qualified immunity in her communications with Shanley unless Russell reasonably should have known that those communications violated clearly established … In the event that this threshold determination reveals a possible constitutional violation, “ ‘[a] qualified immunity defense is established if (a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it

    Cited 140 timesPublished
  • Ramirez v. Webb

    835 F.2d 1153 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 23, 1987

    Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), the Supreme Court established that officials are denied qualified immunity only when their alleged acts violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional … Accordingly, defendant INS agents have qualified immunity unless plaintiffs’ “rights were so clearly established when the acts were committed that any officer in the defendant’s position, measured objectively, would have

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Phyllis J. May v. City of Nahunta, Georgia

    846 F.3d 1320 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 19, 2017

    In evaluating a government actor’s entitlement to qualified immunity, the Supreme Court has developed an objective-reasonableness test wherein “the official’s actions must be evaluated against ‘clearly established law,’ … Second, we determine whether that right was clearly established at the time of alleged conduct. Id.

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Farrington v. Poole

    Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 6, 2026

    Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages if ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Second, the doctrine of qualified immunity required the district court to apply only clearly established law to the defendants’ conduct.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • African Trade & Information Center, Inc., Mohamoud D. Ahmed, and Alan W. Gates v. James F. Abromaitis

    294 F.3d 355 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 23, 2002

    The First Amendment Claim The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Even if a district court decision could “establish” a right for the purpose of the qualified immunity inquiry, A.F.C.

    Cited 73 timesPublished
  • Picariello v. Commonwealth

    54 Pa. Commw. 252 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 15, 1980

    However, plaintiff’s complaint clearly contradicts that claim, by alleging that the Secretary acted as a Commonwealth agent. 6 The guidelines established in DuBree v. … Defendant shall file an answer, possibly with new matter addressing the issue of qualified official immunity, if desired.

    Cited 17 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.