Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1800

10,000+ results

2.66s

  • Crenshaw v. Lister

    556 F.3d 1283 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 6, 2009

    Turning to the issue of qualified immunity and, after finding that Crenshaw had to establish the violation of a clearly-established right, the court concluded that, under Crenshaw’s version of the facts, “no reasonable … Qualified Immunity “Qualified 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 206 timesPublished
  • Ratliff v. Dekalb County

    62 F.3d 338 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 17, 1995

    the applicable law was clearly established. … The right to be free from retaliation is clearly established as a first amendment right and as a statutory right under Title VII; but no clearly established right exists under the equal protection clause to be free from retaliation

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Donovan v. City Of Milwaukee

    17 F.3d 944 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 18, 1994

    II. 5 Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, "governmental officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … are entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 64 timesPublished
  • Young ex rel. Bucy v. Jefferson County Sheriff

    318 P.3d 458 · Supreme Court of Colorado · Jan 13, 2014

    by the legislature, and both clearly indicate that the good faith of any person who qualifies for immunity "shall be presumed." … To hold otherwise would impermissibly defile the legislature's attempt to immunize qualifying law enforcement officers from liability.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • LeSUEUR-RICHMOND SLATE CORP. v. FEHRER

    752 F. Supp. 2d 713 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Nov 3, 2010

    When evaluating a qualified immunity claim, the district court should generally first determine whether a right “would have been violated on the facts alleged; [and] ... second ... whether the right was clearly established … Qualified immunity shields government officials from suit unless they transgress rights that are “clearly established.” Saucier, 533 U.S. at 200, 121 S.Ct. 2151 (2001).

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Flora v. Sw. Iowa Narcotics Enforcement Task Force

    292 F. Supp. 3d 875 · District Court, S.D. Iowa · Feb 12, 2018

    Qualified Immunity Standard "Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability and the burdens of litigation unless the official's conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of … immunity because her advice contravened clearly established law.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • George WICKS, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MISSISSIPPI STATE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES, Et Al., Defendants, Hazel Cook, Defendant-Appellant

    41 F.3d 991 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 6, 1995

    To overcome the immunity defense, the complaint must allege facts that, if proven, would demonstrate that Cook violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. 12 Heightened pleading demands more than bald … While Wicks does allege racial animus, an element of the prima facie case for his discrimination claim, he fails to allege any conduct of Cook that could be considered to “violate a clearly established statutory ... right

    Overruled on other grounds by Carswell v. Camp, 37 F.4th 1062 (2022)Cited 190 timesPublished
  • Cox v. Village of Pleasantville

    271 F. Supp. 3d 591 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 26, 2017

    Qualified immunity shields a defendant from standing trial or facing other burdens of litigation “if either (a) the defendant’s, action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the … As there is no clearly-established law holding that a stop under these or similar circumstances is impermissible, the Court agrees that, Hess is entitled to qualified immunity with respect to his Fourth Amendment seizure

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Michalik v. Hermann

    422 F.3d 252 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 18, 2005

    Evaluating qualified immunity is a two-step process. First, we determine whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional or statutory right. See Siegert v. … An officer need only plead his good faith, which then shifts the burden to the plaintiff, who must rebut the defense by establishing that the officer’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law. Id.

    Cited 189 timesPublished
  • Kim Brown v. Muhlenberg Township

    269 F.3d 205 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 11, 2001

    IV. 65 Let me amplify my earlier analysis explaining the second prong -- the clearly established prong-- of the qualified immunity doctrine. … the clearly established element of the immunity doctrine.

    Cited 317 timesPublished
  • Clark v. Valletta

    Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 6, 2025

    “Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined as the right to be free from” a given constitutional injury. Id. … CONCLUSION In sum, the district court improperly denied qualified immunity to Defendants because there is no clearly established right to specific gender-dysphoria treatments.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Mark Abbott v. Laurie J. Latshaw, Albert Diehl, Dennis George, Robert Stafford and Donald Sarsfield

    164 F.3d 141 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 11, 1998

    Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields public officials performing discretionary functions from § 1983 and Fourteenth Amendment liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … Our qualified immunity inquiry thus proceeds in two steps. See Sharrar v. Felsing, 128 F.3d 810, 828 (3d Cir.1997). First, we must determine whether the defendants violated “clearly established” rights.

    Cited 229 timesPublished
  • Gant v. Maness

    786 So. 2d 401 · Mississippi Supreme Court · Jun 7, 2001

    This, according to longstanding Mississippi law, is clearly insufficient to establish a duty of care owing to him in particular: when the duty imposed upon an officer is one solely to the public, the failure to perform it … Now, in developing his argument for qualified immunity, Gant asserts that his duties regarding Thompson's incarceration were discretionary and that he is, thus, entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Angel Mendez v. County of Los Angeles

    815 F.3d 1178 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 2, 2016

    The court also held that its conclusions in each respect were supported by clearly established law and that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity. … In the absence of clearly established law that squarely governs the situation here, qualified immunity is appropriate on the knock-and-announce claim. Id. at 309.

    Overruled on other grounds by County of Los Angeles v. Mendez, 137 S. Ct. 1539 (2017)Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Palmieri v. Clark County

    2015 NV 102 · Nevada Supreme Court · Dec 31, 2015

    Ct. 305, 308 (2015) ("The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established .. … A searching officer is entitled to qualified immunity if "a reasonable officer could have believed" that the search was lawful "in light of clearly established law and the information

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Williams v. Schismenos

    258 F. Supp. 3d 842 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 28, 2017

    Qualified Immunity Analysis The defendant officers maintain that qualified immunity protects them from liability for all federal claims asserted against them in their individual capacities. … The qualified immunity doctrine shields government officials performing discretionary actions from civil damages liability if their actions did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Oregon Department of Corrections

    751 F.3d 983 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 29, 2014

    Government officials who perform discretionary functions generally are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … We begin with the second prong of the qualified- immunity analysis: whether the right was clearly established BROWN V. OREGON DEP’T OF CORR. 13 at the time of the alleged violation.

    Cited 114 timesPublished
  • Mitchell v. Miller

    56 F. Supp. 3d 57 · District Court, D. Maine · Sep 26, 2014

    prong (whether the right was clearly established). … established law for purposes of qualified immunity.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Hicks v. Phipps

    765 F. Supp. 1541 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Feb 5, 1990

    Public officials have qualified immunity under the rule of Harlow v. … Therefore, Vanover is entitled to qualified immunity from Mrs. Hicks’ claim for civil damages.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Mincieli v. Bruder

    914 F. Supp. 512 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 7, 1994

    Mineieli can meet this burden by demonstrating that Bruder’s actions violated clearly established constitutional law. Lowe v. Aldridge, 958 F.2d 1565, 1570 (11th Cir.1992). … than on qualified immunity. 6 .

    Cited 4 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.