Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.82s
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 timesPublishedCummerlander 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 timesPublishedBeatrice 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 timesPublished885 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 timesPublished79 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 timesPublished214 F. Supp. 2d 69 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 26, 2002
was clearly established at the time of the [official’s] alleged violation.” … If courts deciding § 1983 suits on the basis of qualified immunity were to tackle the difficult substantive law, then the law would become 'clearly established' so that officers presented with similar factual scenarios in
Cited 2 timesPublishedTexas 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 timesPublished994 F.3d 95 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 12, 2021
She argues that, as a matter of law, King has failed to allege a violation of a clearly established constitutional right and she is thus entitled to qualified immunity. We agree. … and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”
Cited 139 timesPublished45 Wash. App. 182 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 27, 1986
The test enunciated in Harlow has effectively eliminated the subjective component of qualified immunity, establishing a purely objective standard. 4 The defendants had a right to believe they could operate as they did since … We note that this qualified immunity created in Bivens, unlike the qualified immunity enunciated later in Harlow for § 1983 actions, is based on both a good faith (subjective) and reasonableness (objective) test.
Cited 13 timesPublished182 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 timesPublished835 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 timesPublishedPhyllis 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 timesPublishedCourt 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 timesPublished656 F.3d 365 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 8, 2011
Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 202 (2001) (“The relevant, dispositive inquiry in determining whether a right is clearly established is whether it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation … Appellants cite a number of cases to support their qualified immunity argument that the right not to be arrested in the circumstances presented in this case is not clearly established.
Cited 36 timesPublishedParker v. Board Of Regents Of Tulsa Junior College
981 F.2d 1159 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 17, 1992
Id.; Patrick, 953 F.2d at 1243 . 10 Once a defendant asserts qualified immunity, "[t]he plaintiff carries the burden of convincing the court that the law was clearly established." … Accordingly, they maintain that plaintiff's action is barred by the doctrine of qualified immunity. 14 To determine whether plaintiff's action is barred by qualified immunity, we first consider whether she was deprived of
Cited 18 timesPublished294 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 timesPublished190 F.3d 693 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 29, 1999
Finally, the district court held that even if the ADA did apply to prisons, the defendants would be qualifiedly immune from suit thereunder because Hall’s rights under the ADA were not clearly established at the time of … not clearly established prior to Yeskey.
Cited 91 timesPublished54 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 timesPublished464 F. Supp. 2d 536 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Dec 13, 2006
Thus, a defendant’s entitlement to qualified immunity must be resolved “at the earliest possible stage in litigation.” Id. The Supreme Court has established a two-part qualified immunity inquiry. … Meeker, 415 F.3d at 320 ("Only if a plaintiff alleges the violation of a clearly established constitutional right does his complaint survive a motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds.”).
Cited 3 timesPublishedSheryl J. Howard v. Jan Dickerson, and Charles Milton, Keith Purdue
34 F.3d 978 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 7, 1994
The Martin court upheld the denial of qualified immunity because Garcia clearly established pretrial detainees share the same protection from deliberate indifference to serious medical needs as convicted inmates. … When a defendant raises the issue of qualified immunity on a summary judgment motion, the plaintiff must demonstrate the alleged conduct constituted a violation of law and the law was clearly established at the time of the
Cited 76 timesPublished
Ask Donna