Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1861

10,000+ results

4.47s

  • Gidley v. Oliveri

    641 F. Supp. 2d 92 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Jun 25, 2009

    The defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the federal claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because the booking-and-summons of Gidley did not implicate a clearly established Fourth Amendment right such that a reasonable … Clearly established right “Public officials are ... entitled to qualified immunity unless the facts establish that their conduct violated a constitutional right that was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.

    Cited 3 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
  • Brockway v. Shepherd

    942 F. Supp. 1012 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 4, 1996

    III.QUALIFIED IMMUNITY A defendant is entitled to qualified immunity from a claim of a violation of a constitutional right if the right was not clearly established at the time of the alleged deprivation and the contours of … WMe the abstract right to be free from unreasonable seizure clearly is established, for qualified immunity purposes the right must be considered on a more specific level: “[t]he contours of the right must be sufficiently

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Looney v. Black

    702 F.3d 701 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 21, 2012

    To determine whether Black is entitled to qualified immunity as to Looney’s procedural due process claim, we must determine also whether the constitutionally protected property right was “clearly established.” 2 Reichle, … To defeat an assertion of qualified immunity, an employee’s constitutional right to free speech must also be “clearly established” under the law. Reichle, 132 S.Ct. at 2093 .

    Cited 79 timesPublished
  • Jones v. State

    166 P.3d 1219 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 17, 2007

    of a clearly established constitutional right. … ] Once the defendant asserts qualified immunity, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant violated a clearly established constitutional right in order to survive summary judgment. [23] Jones claims the individual defendants

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Brandy Kane v. Shawn Barger

    902 F.3d 185 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 22, 2018

    The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of Barger, finding that—even if Barger’s conduct was unlawful—he was still immune from suit under the exacting “clearly established” prong of our qualified immunity analysis … As such, the right was clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity. III.

    Cited 57 timesPublished
  • Warney v. City of Rochester

    536 F. Supp. 2d 285 · District Court, W.D. New York · Feb 11, 2008

    are covered by qualified immunity. … LEXIS 18002 (N.D.Ill.2002) (finding that a due process right to disclosure of post-conviction exculpatory evidence exists, but granting qualified immunity because the right was not “clearly established” in 1997), aff'd in

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Pinder v. Johnson

    54 F.3d 1169 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 30, 1995

    Qualified immunity under § 1983 shields officials from civil liability unless their actions violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Where the law is clearly established, and where no reasonable officer could believe he was acting in accordance with it, qualified immunity will not attach.

    Cited 179 timesPublished
  • Swint v. City of Wadley

    5 F.3d 1435 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 3, 1993

    However, these factual disputes do not preclude a grant of summary judgment premised on a defendant’s qualified immunity if the legal norms allegedly violated were not clearly established at the time' of the challenged actions … Because such a due process right was not clearly established at the time of the raids in this case, Sheriff Morgan, Chief Morgan and Officer Dendinger are entitled to qualified immunity on the due process claims.

    Superseded by statute, as recognized in Lin Guo Xi v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, OpinionCited 52 timesPublished
  • Trevino v. Gates

    798 F. Supp. 621 · District Court, C.D. California · Aug 7, 1992

    established law. … Under Harlow , the council members would be entitled to qualified immunity for acts in the course of their duties “insofar as their conduct [did] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Womble v. Singing River Hosp.

    618 So. 2d 1252 · Mississippi Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1993

    Qualified Immunity The trial court granted summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity to the members of the board of trustees for Singing River Hospital, Dr. Jack Longmire, Dr. … Moreover, it promotes a goal beyond the pale of the traditional justification for qualified immunity. Today, we hold that common law qualified public official immunity will be restricted to its designed purpose.

    Abrogated — as noted by a later courtCited 93 timesPublished
  • Airday v. The City Of New York

    District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 13, 2019

    Qualified immunity shields a government official from money damages when his conduct did “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … A defendant has qualified immunity from a due-process claim when it was not clearly established at the time of the alleged deprivation that the purported property or liberty interest of which the plaintiff was deprived

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Buford v. Holladay

    133 F.R.D. 487 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Dec 18, 1990

    Once a section 1983 plaintiff establishes that the law defining the allegedly violated right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation, the qualified immunity defense will ordinarily fail, “since a reasonably … immunity if the right allegedly violated in this matter was clearly established at the time that the violation occurred.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Friedland v. Fauver

    6 F. Supp. 2d 292 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 31, 1998

    Qualified Immunity ' Defendants contend that summary judgment should be entered in their favor based on qualified immunity because they did not violate any clearly established constitutional right of Friedland. … “Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Electric Fetus Co. v. City of Duluth

    547 N.W.2d 448 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · May 14, 1996

    State officials are entitled to qualified immunity when “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before commencement of discovery. Mitchell v.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Estate Frank P. Lagano v. Bergen County Prosecutors Offi

    769 F.3d 850 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 15, 2014

    Mordaga responded that he is entitled to qualified immunity on the state-created danger claims because the Estate failed to establish either a violation of a constitutional right, or that the constitutional right was clearly … The District Court focused on the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, holding that the constitutional right claimed to have been violated was not clearly established at the time of Lagano’s murder.

    Cited 279 timesPublished
  • Pucci v. Nineteenth District Court

    628 F.3d 752 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 16, 2010

    “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects 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 … If a constitutional violation can be found, the second prong of a qualified immunity analysis examines “whether the right was clearly established” at the time of the deprivation. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201.

    Cited 141 timesPublished
  • Calabretta v. Floyd

    189 F.3d 808 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 26, 1999

    They claim qualified immunity on the ground that there is no clearly established principle to the contrary. The principle they urged is too broad. … It is not clear that a conflict among other circuits would create qualified immunity where clearly established law in this circuit would preclude it, 19 but even if it could, these cases would not establish such an open question

    Cited 70 timesPublished
  • Rita Carroll v. Fredrick W. Pfeffer

    262 F.3d 847 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 23, 2001

    Qualified immunity is a defense available to government officials who can prove that their conduct did “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Next, Carroll asserts that Officer Pfeffer was not entitled to summary judgment based upon qualified immunity because he violated her clearly established constitutional right to freedom of speech by retaliating against her

    Cited 43 timesPublished
  • Harris County v. Michael J. Hall

    Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Jan 22, 2026

    Governmental Immunity and Plea to the Jurisdiction Governmental units are immune from suit unless immunity is clearly and unambiguously waived by state law. City of San Antonio v. … Hall failed to establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination because he could not establish that at the time of his termination he was qualified for the job.

    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.