Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1908

10,000+ results

2.51s

  • John Montin v. Y. Moore

    846 F.3d 289 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 19, 2017

    A state official is immune from liability unless he or she “violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable official would have known.” Carpenter v. … When determining whether a public official is entitled to qualified immunity, we examine (1) whether the official violated the plaintiff’s constitutional or statutory right, and (2) whether that right was clearly established

    Cited 65 timesPublished
  • Padgett v. Wright

    587 F.3d 983 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 20, 2009

    The reasoning behind this departure from the general rule is that qualified immunity is “an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability; ... it is effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to … at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.”

    Cited 3,114 timesPublished
  • Florance v. Buchmeyer

    500 F. Supp. 2d 618 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 31, 2007

    To determine whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, the threshold question is whether, on the facts as alleged by plaintiff, a clearly established constitutional right would have been violated. … In addressing a claim of qualified immunity, a court must first determine whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right, which is a purely legal question. Siegert v.

    Cited 31 timesPublished
  • Dorothea Gravely v. John Madden

    142 F.3d 345 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 21, 1998

    He is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. … Put another way, the question of whether Madden is protected by qualified immunity turns on the objective reasonableness of his actions, assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time they

    Cited 32 timesPublished
  • Fittanto v. Klein

    788 F. Supp. 1451 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 18, 1992

    Because the law in 1984 and 1985 was not clearly established, the court held that the defendants who interviewed the children were entitled to qualified immunity. Id. … Because the law in this area is not clearly established, defendant Klein is entitled to qualified immunity for her conduct. Plaintiffs counter that this case is remarkably like Snell v.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Slone v. Lincoln County

    242 F. Supp. 3d 579 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Mar 16, 2017

    Generally, a government official performing discretionary functions is entitled to qualified immunity in his individual capacity and is shielded from civil suit if his conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … whether that right was clearly established at the time of the offense.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Staley v. Lingerfelt

    134 N.C. App. 294 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 20, 1999

    App. at 725-26 , 460 S.E.2d at 211 : ‘The test of qualified immunity for police officers sued under [section 1983] is whether [the officers’ conduct violated] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … In ruling on the defense of qualified immunity we must: (1) identify the specific right allegedly violated; (2) determine whether the right allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of the violation; and (3)

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • Smith v. Nixon

    582 F. Supp. 709 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 16, 1984

    Sullivan and Cartha DeLoach: Qualified Immunity The remaining defendants move for summary judgment under the qualified immunity doctrine established in Harlow, supra. … of qualified immunity.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Kenneth Bailey v. Shawn T. Swindell

    940 F.3d 1295 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 16, 2019

    ,” and qualified immunity applies. … established’ step of the qualified-immunity analysis.”

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Daryl L. Davis v. Calzona Hall, Ex-Director, St. Louis County Department of Justice Services, in His Individual Capacity Dora B. Schriro, Director, Missouri Department of Corrections, in Her Individual Capacity Robert A. Meechum, Lieutenant Jacqueline D. Young St. Louis County Brian Goeke Larry Wilson Susan Martin Stacy Breedon John Prier Travis Clyburn, Barbara Knell Rebecca Atterberry, Pat Roll, Daryl L. Davis v. Calzona Hall, Ex-Director, St. Louis County Department of Justice Services, in His Individual Capacity Dora B. Schriro, Director, Missouri Department of Corrections, in Her Individual Capacity Robert A. Meechum, Lieutenant Jacqueline D. Young St. Louis County Brian Goeke Larry Wilson, Susan Martin Stacy Breedon John Prier Travis Clyburn, Barbara Knell Rebecca Atterberry Pat Roll, Daryl L. Davis v. Calzona Hall, Ex-Director, St. Louis County Department of Justice Services, in His Individual Capacity Dora B. Schriro, Director, Missouri Department of Corrections, in Her Individual Capacity Robert A. Meechum, Lieutenant Jacqueline D. Young St. Louis County Brian Goeke Larry Wilson, Susan Martin Stacy Breedon John Prier Travis Clyburn Barbara Knell Rebecca Atterberry Pat Roll

    375 F.3d 703 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 21, 2004

    alleged deprivation of a recognized constitutional right, that this right was clearly established, and that outstanding questions of fact preclude summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity as to state defendants … Clearly Established 59 The second question that we must ask in our qualified immunity analysis is whether the constitutional right alleged to have been violated was clearly established.

    Cited 178 timesPublished
  • Gehl Group v. Koby

    838 F. Supp. 1409 · District Court, D. Colorado · Dec 2, 1993

    Qualified immunity allows a public official to escape liability if his conduct did not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Violation of Plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment Bights Next, I must examine the second component of Plaintiffs’ § 1983 claim to determine whether Defendants violated clearly established law precluding qualified immunity.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Joseph Jones v. City of Jackson, Malcolm McMillin and Les Tannehill

    203 F.3d 875 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 20, 2000

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The first inquiry in examining a defense of qualified immunity asserted in a motion for summary judgment is whether the plaintiff has alleged “the violation of a clearly established constitutional right … of the clearly established legal rules.

    Cited 139 timesPublished
  • Herman Harris v. Zachary Pittman

    927 F.3d 266 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 18, 2019

    that right was not clearly established with the requisite specificity at the time of the incident. … immunity because that right was not "clearly established" with sufficient specificity at the time of the incident.

    Cited 147 timesPublished
  • Carol J. Applewhite v. United States Air Force, Randall L. Faulkner, Leonard Ross, and William E. McBride

    995 F.2d 997 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 10, 1993

    The said officers moved for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity, contending that their acts did not violate any clearly established statutory or constitutional right of Mrs. … It is now well established that a law-enforcement official is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

    Cited 31 timesPublished
  • Marshall v. Russell

    391 F. Supp. 3d 672 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 20, 2018

    Russell alleged he is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate any clearly established constitutional right. ECF No. 55 at 32-34. Sgt. … Qualified immunity.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • City of Corinth v. Gladys

    916 S.W.2d 618 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 14, 1996

    Fairfield filed an original answer asserting his affirmative defense of qualified or official immunity. … The City argues that the establishment of Fairfield’s qualified immunity protects the City from liability that may exist under section 101.021(2) of the Texas Tort Claims Act, which provides governmental liability for “personal

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • City of San Juan, Texas, City of San Juan Police Officers, Juan Rodriguez, Alfredo Lara & Severiano Martinez, & City of San Juan Chief of Police Samuel Soto v. Gonzales, Juan R.

    Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Jun 1, 2000

    the officers are entitled to qualified immunity under federal law as their actions in effecting appellee's arrest were lawful in light of clearly established law and the information possessed by the officers at the time … If there is, we determine whether the government official's "actions were objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law," entitling him to qualified immunity. Id .

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Kerr v. Waddell

    183 Ariz. 1 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Jul 13, 1995

    that they were entitled as a matter of law to qualified immunity. … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.

    Vacated on other grounds by Kerr v. Waddell, 185 Ariz. 457 (1996)Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Swint v. City of Wadley

    51 F.3d 988 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 9, 1995

    Qualified Immunity Law The district court denied the three individual defendants’ motions for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. The denial of qualified immunity is a question of law to be reviewed de novo. … 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.

    Cited 49 timesPublished
  • Trigalet v. Young

    54 F.3d 645 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 2, 1995

    The court held that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity on the Trigalets' substantive due process claim upon concluding that, at the time of the incident, the law was clearly established that the officers … The court concluded that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity because the law under which defendants actions could form the basis of a constitutional claim became clearly established on March 1, 1990, when

    Cited 9 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.