Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1881

10,000+ results

2.48s

  • Diane Sigismondi Judy v. Eastern West Virginia Community and Technical College

    West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 25, 2022

    As discussed herein, Petitioner pled facts demonstrating a violation of this clearly established law, so, per Marple, Eastern is entitled to no qualified immunity here. … clearly established statutory law.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Olivo Gonzalez v. Teacher's Retirement Board

    208 F. Supp. 2d 163 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jun 12, 2002

    Plaintiffs counter by arguing that the doctrine of qualified immunity does not protect the Defendants from a violation of clearly established constitutional or statutory rights, and that the Court should not abstain pursuant … Qualified Immunity Defendants invoke the doctrine of qualified immunity in support of their motion to dismiss.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Anna Chernyy v. Monty Roesler

    Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 11, 2026

    We assume these facts are true, but they do not affect our finding that Moore is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate clearly established law. 3 Chernyy also argues that “sexual assault … Moore is similarly entitled to qualified immunity for the failure to train claim because he did not violate any clearly established right “of which a reasonable person would have known.” Parrish v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Tyler v. Kyler

    15 Neb. Ct. App. 939 · Nebraska Court of Appeals · Sep 11, 2007

    Whether an official may prevail in his or her qualified immunity defense depends upon the objective reasonableness of his or her conduct as measured by reference to clearly established law. Id. … The officers’ conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. They were entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Jones v. Hunt

    410 F.3d 1221 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 14, 2005

    The district court dismissed her claims against Haberman on the basis of qualified immunity, finding that Haberman’s actions did not amount to a seizure and that, even if they did, the law was not clearly established at … established law, the district court granted Haberman’s motion to dismiss on the basis of qualified immunity.

    Cited 92 timesPublished
  • Ducksworth v. Landrum

    62 F.4th 209 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 10, 2023

    Here, as in all qualified immunity cases, the plaintiff must show (A) the violation of a constitutional right that (B) was clearly established at the time of the officers’ conduct. … Qualified immunity protects a law enforcement officer from personal liability in a lawsuit unless a plaintiff shows that the officer’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Tlamka v. Serrell

    244 F.3d 628 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 2, 2001

    A. 9 Qualified immunity protects a governmental official from suit when his "conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Sexton v. … was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation."

    Cited 99 timesPublished
  • Allah v. Brown

    351 F. Supp. 2d 278 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 26, 2004

    Qualified Immunity Even if a plaintiff can establish a constitutional violation, under the doctrine of qualified immunity government officials will not be liable if “[tjheir conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … If the law is not established clearly when an official acts, he is entitled to qualified immunity because he “could not reasonably be expected to anticipate subsequent legal developments.”

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Reiver v. District of Columbia

    925 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 22, 2013

    Since the Court finds that the police conduct was objectively reasonable and did not violate plaintiff’s clearly established rights, the officers are protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity, and the motion will … “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

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Sidney Arnold v. Steven Williams

    979 F.3d 262 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 23, 2020

    pleading the defense of qualified immunity.’” … In this case, Arnold broadly addressed qualified immunity in his original complaint by alleging that Deputy Williams “knowingly violated” “clearly established law.”

    Cited 157 timesPublished
  • King's Grant Inn v. Gilford, et al.

    2005 DNH 022 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Feb 16, 2005

    qualified immunity from liability for enforcing it. … Because the contours of the legal right defendants violated were not clearly established at the time they acted, the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from personal liability, and they are entitled

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Kane ex rel. K.J. v. Chester County Department of Children, Youth & Families

    10 F. Supp. 3d 671 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2014

    The CYF Motion to Dismiss next argues that the discretionary conduct of the CYF defendants is protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity because plaintiff has not pleaded a right that was so clearly established that … clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” James v.

    Cited 30 timesPublished
  • Parrish v. Ball

    594 F.3d 993 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 10, 2010

    Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in their individual capacity so long as the official has not violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.”

    Cited 490 timesPublished
  • Kamel Chaney-Snell v. Andrew Young

    98 F.4th 699 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 15, 2024

    Page 25 clearly established right at the second step of the qualified-immunity analysis. … Besides, Chaney-Snell could not overcome the second step of the qualified-immunity test by using these cases. Unpublished decisions cannot create clearly established rights.

    Cited 57 timesPublished
  • Malik v. Arapahoe County Department of Social Services

    191 F.3d 1306 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 14, 1999

    support a conclusion that Coleman’s actions were outside the scope of absolute immunity, and that both defendants’ actions violated clearly established law. … clearly established at the time of the defendant’s actions.”

    Cited 71 timesPublished
  • Wilson v. Zellner

    200 F. Supp. 2d 1356 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 26, 2002

    immunity because Plaintiff has failed to establish that the alleged constitutional right was clearly established at the time of Zellner’s actions. … Under this prong of the qualified immunity analysis the issue is whether it was clearly established at the time of Defendant Zellner’s actions that it was unlawful for a prison official to detain a prisoner for a period of

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Mata Ex Rel. J.A.M v. City of Farmington

    791 F. Supp. 2d 1118 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Jun 13, 2011

    Once the plaintiff has established the inference that the defendant’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right, a qualified immunity defense generally fails. See Cannon v. … They argue that Mata thus cannot satisfy his burden under the qualified immunity test and show that Rahn’s actions violated a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Brenda Mattox and Dona Holly v. City of Forest Park Stephen Vollmar, Police Chief Ray Hodges and Kenneth Hughes

    183 F.3d 515 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 11, 1999

    immunity, i.e., whether a given set of facts violates clearly established law. … First Amendment Retaliation The qualified immunity inquiry entails a determination of whether the law allegedly violated was “clearly established” at the time of the events at issue.

    Cited 181 timesPublished
  • Abdul Khan v. Newell Normand, Sheriff, et a

    683 F.3d 192 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 1, 2012

    Qualified immunity protects government officials from money damages unless a plaintiff shows: (1) the official violated a statutory or constitutional right; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged … Courts “have discretion to decide which of the two prongs of qualified-immunity analysis to tackle first.” Id.

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Edward Wilhelm v. John A. Boggs, Deputy, and Joseph Tanner, Deputy

    290 F.3d 822 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 22, 2002

    issue whether the federal right allegedly infringed was clearly established.” … established law?

    Cited 10 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.