Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1901

10,000+ results

1.93s

  • Shows v. Morgan

    40 F. Supp. 2d 1345 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Mar 17, 1999

    Where the law that the defendants allegedly violated was not clearly established at the time of the alleged offense, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. See id. at 807 , 102 S.Ct. at 2732 ; Stewart v. … established, and (3) where the qualified immunity determination does end the whole case,” Lewis does not prohibit the. court from first considering a qualified-immunity defense).

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • 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
  • Tiffanie Hupp v. State Trooper Seth Cook

    931 F.3d 307 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 25, 2019

    “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 … An official is not entitled to qualified immunity if he or she deprived an individual of a constitutional right and that right was clearly established at the time of the violation. Pearson, 555 U.S. at 231.

    Cited 176 timesPublished
  • Hudgins v. City Of Ashburn

    890 F.2d 396 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 24, 1990

    The Zeigler/Rich Analysis for Determining Summary Judgment Based on Qualified Immunity 29 Rich recognized that the Supreme Court established its objective-reasonableness test for determining qualified or good-faith immunity … or not that law is clearly established.

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • City of Laredo v. Leal

    161 S.W.3d 558 · Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · Feb 11, 2005

    Qualified Immunity Dovalina next argues the trial court erred in denying his motion for summary judgment on Leal’s substantive and procedural due process claims on the ground of qualified immunity. 3 We again agree. … “The well-established test for qualified immunity requires us to engage in a two-step inquiry.” Sanchez v. Swyden, 139 F.3d 464, 466 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 872 , 119 S.Ct. 170 , 142 L.Ed.2d 139 (1998).

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Reeves v. Thigpen

    879 F. Supp. 1153 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Mar 16, 1995

    Under this test, public officials performing discretionary functions which would objectively appear to be within the official’s authority have qualified immunity if their challenged conduct did not violate a clearly established … To defeat a qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff bears the burden of showing that the “legal norms allegedly violated by the defendant were clearly established at the time of the challenged actions or, ... the law clearly

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Jenne v. Maranto

    825 So. 2d 409 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 21, 2002

    Section 216(b), in turn, clearly provides for suits by individuals against States. … Accordingly, the reasoning that underlies the immediate appealability of an order denying ... qualified immunity should be...

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Almonte v. City Of Long Beach

    478 F.3d 100 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Feb 14, 2007

    Qualified Immunity Based on the "Policymaker Exception" 24 The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials from personal liability for official actions, "unless their conduct violates clearly established constitutional … Stated differently, an official is entitled to qualified immunity (1) if the plaintiff has not alleged a violation of a constitutional right, (2) if that right was not clearly established at the time of the conduct, or (3

    Cited 55 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
  • Livingood v. Meece

    477 N.W.2d 183 · North Dakota Supreme Court · Nov 12, 1991

    Meece asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity under the circumstances of this case. … 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 55 timesPublished
  • Jerry Hollingsworth and Kenneth Anderson v. Kim Hackler, Individually and as Next Friend for C. H., a Minor, and Steve Hackler, Individually and as Next Friend for C. H., a Minor

    Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) · Dec 31, 2009

    of qualified immunity shields an official performing discretionary functions from individual liability for civil damages under § 1983 if the official’s “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … ’s conduct violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right.18 A right is “clearly established” when its contours are “sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Schubert v. City of Rye

    775 F. Supp. 2d 689 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 31, 2011

    A government official may be entitled to qualified immunity if either his “conduct did not violate plaintiffs clearly established rights or if it would have been objectively reasonable for the official to believe that his … “A defendant pleading qualified immunity on a motion to dismiss is entitled to prevail if the allegations in the complaint fail to state a claim of violation of clearly established law.” Id.

    Cited 58 timesPublished
  • Ellis v. Vance

    227 F. Supp. 3d 627 · District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Jan 3, 2017

    As discussed below, plaintiffs failure to offer more specific authority means that she is unable to establish the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity test, but it also makes it exceedingly difficult for … This court now turns to the second, or “clearly established,” prong of the qualified immunity standard. The U.S.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Nampa Classical Academy v. Goesling

    714 F. Supp. 2d 1079 · District Court, D. Idaho · May 17, 2010

    Qualified Immunity Standard “Qualified immunity serves to shield government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … “Whether a right is ‘clearly established’ for purposes of qualified immunity is an inquiry that ‘must be undertaken in light *1091 of the specific context of the case, not as a broad general proposition.’

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Oldridge v. Wichita, Kansas, City of

    District Court, D. Kansas · Nov 30, 2022

    While an issue of fact as to whether it was reasonably foreseeable that these actions would lead to a violation of Plaintiff’s clearly established rights, qualified immunity requires a plaintiff to prove more than a reasonably … Plaintiff has failed to show under a qualified immunity analysis that Givens, Salcido, and Ramsay violated a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Kauffman v. Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

    766 F. Supp. 2d 555 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 16, 2011

    Pertinent to qualified immunity, a defendant may raise an affirmative defense “on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion if the predicate establishing the defense is apparent from the face of the complaint.” Bethel v. … Second, “if a violation could be made out on a favorable view of the parties’ submissions, the next, sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established.” Id.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Smith v. Stafford

    189 P.3d 1065 · Alaska Supreme Court · Aug 8, 2008

    that qualified immunity is appropriate. … 42 If the allegations show a constitutional violation, courts then must determine whether the right allegedly violated was "clearly established," which occurs where the "contours of the right [are] sufficiently clear that

    Cited 35 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
  • Gooden v. Howard County

    954 F.2d 960 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 23, 1992

    Gooden further argues that the defendants did not act reasonably in light of clearly established law. … However, “if the test of ‘clearly established law’ were to be applied at this level of generality,”....

    Cited 114 timesPublished
  • McClennon v. Kipke

    821 F. Supp. 2d 1101 · District Court, D. Minnesota · Oct 31, 2011

    Seizing on Chambers, the Individual Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity here because (1) McClennon suffered only de minimis injuries and (2) it was not clearly established on December 20, 2006, that inflicting … to qualified immunity on the excessive-force claim.

    Cited 6 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.