Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1951

10,000+ results

3.92s

  • Dixon v. Von Blanckensee

    994 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 timesPublished
  • Scott v. City of Columbus, Unpublished Decision (3-30-2001)

    Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 30, 2001

    of clearly established law and the information that he possessed. … defendant's conduct did indeed violate clearly established rights).

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • 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
  • Willie Flowers v. Nicholas Renfro

    46 F.4th 631 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 19, 2022

    “Because qualified immunity pro- tects the public officer from the expense and distraction of having to stand trial when the conduct in question did not vi- olate clearly established law, the unavailability of an immedi- … If a determination of qualified immunity in a summary judgment motion depends on the resolution of fact questions, the order denying qualified immunity generally is not appeal- able. Johnson v.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Linda Surratt v. Brian McClarin

    851 F.3d 389 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 14, 2017

    EDITH BROWN CLEMENT, Circuit Judge: In this qualified immunity case, the question on appeal is whether—in light of clearly established law at the time of the incident—officers acted objectively unreasonably when they … But qualified immunity insulates those government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • Hall v. United States

    704 F.2d 246 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 25, 1983

    Most recently the Supreme Court refined the limits of qualified, good faith immunity, placing “[r]eliance on the objective reasonableness of an official’s conduct, as measured by reference to clearly established law.” … Under this approach summary judgment should issue on the grounds of qualified, good faith immunity if the official’s conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights at the time the challenged

    Cited 110 timesPublished
  • Brown v. United States

    851 F.2d 615 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 21, 1988

    Since Granata’s remedy of dismissal for properly established qualified immunity remains open, mandamus is not available. I. … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.

    Disagreed with in part by Hallock v. Bonner, 387 F.3d 147 (2004)Cited 34 timesPublished
  • Patricia Juanita Wate v. Kenneth Kubler

    839 F.3d 1012 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 12, 2016

    force in violation of the Fourth Amendment, that was clearly established at the time. … Qualified Immunity AQualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages for torts committed while performing discretionary duties unless their conduct violates a clearly established statutory

    Cited 53 timesPublished
  • J. Gilliam v. Kenneth Sealey

    932 F.3d 216 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 30, 2019

    Because Appellees have alleged facts sufficient to show that the officers violated their clearly established Fourth Amendment and due process rights, we affirm the district court's denial of qualified immunity. I. A. … Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for violations of constitutional rights so long as they could reasonably believe that their conduct did not violate clearly established law. Harlow v.

    Cited 79 timesPublished
  • Mark v. Williams

    45 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 timesPublished
  • Jones v. City & County of Denver

    854 F.2d 1206 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 12, 1988

    Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields governmental officials from personal liability unless their actions violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … He relies on Colorado statutory and decisional law to argue that clearly established law requires arrest warrants in all cases.

    Cited 138 timesPublished
  • Farid v. Ellen

    514 F. Supp. 2d 482 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 15, 2007

    Thus, the qualified immunity defense is available, as a matter of law, to all defendants because the right was not clearly established. … All defendants are entitled to summary judgment on the defense of qualified immunity because the right was not clearly established.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Caudill v. Hollan

    431 F.3d 900 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 14, 2005

    Qualified Immunity Defendant Hollan argues that she deserves qualified immunity because the law concerning patronage dismissals of deputy county clerks was not clearly established, particularly in light of Cope … immunity due to the absence of clearly established law.

    Cited 88 timesPublished
  • Barnes v. Dekalb County

    898 F. Supp. 2d 1317 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Sep 24, 2012

    Scott, 610 F.3d 701, 714 (11th Cir.2010) (qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities as long as their conduct does not “ ‘violate clearly established statutory … As discussed, qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for conduct that does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Nelson v. Silverman

    888 F. Supp. 1041 · District Court, S.D. California · Jun 6, 1995

    The Bothke court merely assumed that there is a clearly established right of freedom from abusive tax collection activities for the purposes of dealing with a qualified immunity issue. … A defendant would be immune from suit if he could establish that his actions were objectively reasonable by reference to clearly established law. Harlow v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Parkway Bank & Trust v. City of Darien

    43 Ill. App. 3d 400 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 17, 1976

    On this basis an award of damages against public officials with qualified immunity “would be inimical to the efficient functioning of government.” (Rasmussen v. City of Lake Forest, 404 F. Supp. 148, 159 .) … Supp. 148, 159 , states that even where government officials are granted qualified immunity they are still absolutely immune “to damages in the absence of malice ° * * whenever at the time of the action a substantial question

    Cited 58 timesPublished
  • Simmie Whitt v. Roger Smith

    832 F.2d 451 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 2, 1987

    On summary judgment, the judge appropriately may determine, not only the currently applicable law, but whether that law was clearly established at the time an action occurred .... … If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct. ... ...

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Lauren Graham v. C. Gagnon

    831 F.3d 176 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 27, 2016

    “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … The shield of qualified immunity is lost when a government official (1) violates a constitutional right and (2) that right was clearly established. See, e.g., Merchant, 677 F.3d at 661.

    Cited 67 timesPublished
  • Manion v. Michigan Board of Medicine

    765 F.2d 590 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 24, 1985

    If the law which the defendant it alleged to have violated is clearly established, then the qualified immunity defense should fail and discovery should proceed. … If the law is not clearly established, the defendant is immune.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Jessica McKee v. Jessica Brady

    Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 17, 2026

    “Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity unless they violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … We therefore conclude that Brady is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 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.