Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1908

10,000+ results

1.40s

  • Hafley v. Lohman

    90 F.3d 264 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 3, 1996

    We note that "qualified immunity is an affirmative defense," and "it will be upheld on a 12(b)(6) motion only when the immunity is established on the face of the complaint." Id. … The defendants in this case are entitled to qualified immunity unless Hafley has alleged the violation of a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. Id.

    Cited 66 timesPublished
  • Elfers v. Varnau

    101 F. Supp. 3d 753 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 31, 2015

    Qualified immunity shields “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … The court held that because this right was not “clearly established,” the coroner was entitled to qualified immunity from a Section 1983 claim brought after the wrong body was delivered to the family of the decedent.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Osborne v. Harris County

    97 F. Supp. 3d 911 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 31, 2015

    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 would have known … A Clearly Established Right The remaining qualified immunity issue is whether the deputies had fair notice that their actions violated a clearly established right.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Sarah Doe v. Jerald Neveleff

    751 F.3d 383 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 6, 2014

    “[E]valuating qualified immunity is a two-step process, and the burden is on the plaintiff to prove that a government official is not entitled to qualified immunity.” Wyatt v. … Even if we were to construe the Fifth Amendment to extend so far, no established authority at the time of the assaults would have enabled Plaintiffs to overcome qualified immunity.

    Cited 49 timesPublished
  • Brittany J. Buckley v. Hennepin County

    9 F.4th 757 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 16, 2021

    immunity, (v) the physician defendants are entitled to qualified immunity “because the Court has seen no evidence that designing, implementing, and overseeing the ketamine studies violated a clearly established right,” and … “Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known

    Cited 35 timesPublished
  • Evett v. DETNTFF

    330 F.3d 681 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 3, 2003

    The law could not be more clear that an individual has a clearly established right to be free from unlawful arrest. … First, the plaintiff must allege the violation of a clearly established right.

    Cited 61 timesPublished
  • Long v. Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority

    1 Am. Tribal Law 385 · Mohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court · Dec 5, 1997

    The Discriminatory Employment Practices Ordinance further establishes two types of matters which may be brought to The Gaming Disputes Court, Claims and Appeals, and those qualified to file either one are strictly and narrowly … Section 502 of Mohegan Tribal Ordinance 95-4, which established the Gaming Disputes Court, specifies that nothing in the ordinance establishing the Gaming Disputes Court “shall be construed as a waiver of the sovereign immunity

    Cited 30 timesPublished
  • Vines v. City of Dallas, Tex.

    851 F. Supp. 254 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 28, 1994

    Defendant Hart has asserted the defense of qualified immunity to Plaintiffs claim. In determining whether Defendant Hart has established her defense of qualified immunity, the Court uses a two-prong analysis. … Defendant Hart has asserted the defense of qualified immunity to Plaintiffs claim. Therefore, the Court must decide whether Hart violated a clearly established right of the Plaintiff. The Court finds that Hart did not.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Estate of Redd v. Love

    62 F. Supp. 3d 1268 · District Court, D. Utah · Oct 15, 2014

    Qualified Immunity Defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Agent Barnes is entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • David Allen v. Charles McClelland, Jr.

    815 F.3d 239 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 9, 2016

    DEFENDANTS ARE ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … A plaintiff can overcome a qualified immunity defense by showing “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.

    Cited 53 timesPublished
  • Maxfield v. Bressler

    20 F. Supp. 3d 1084 · District Court, D. Colorado · Nov 18, 2013

    To resolve qualified immunity claims, a court must consider two elements: (1) whether a constitutional violation occurred, and (2) whether the violated right was “clearly established” at the time of the violation. … However, they assert that Bresslér is entitled to qualified immunity from suit because the violated right was not clearly established law.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Braxton v. Matthews

    883 F. Supp. 1068 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Apr 28, 1995

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Next the Court must examine whether Defendant is protected from suit by the doctrine of qualified immunity. In Wiley v. … if the officer’s ‘conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Omni Behavioral Health v. Steve Miller

    285 F.3d 646 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 21, 2002

    But, public officials are entitled to qualified immunity and shielded from liability when their conduct does not "violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … immunity test and prove that such a right was clearly established.

    Cited 40 timesPublished
  • Hans Bothke v. Fluor Engineers & Constructors, Inc., and W.J. Terry

    834 F.2d 804 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 16, 1987

    Thus, the flaw in the reasoning of Bothke I was that the panel examined Terry’s qualified immunity in a Bivens action by looking to see if she had violated Bothke’s clearly established statutory rights. … If Bothke had a clearly established constitutional right to have his March 15 letter construed as a request for abatement, then Terry’s right to assert qualified immunity would depend on the objective reasonableness of Terry

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Putnam v. Keller

    332 F.3d 541 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 22, 2003

    We will affirm a grant of summary judgment based on qualified immunity if the "conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v. … clearly established.

    Cited 10 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
  • Frias v. Demings

    823 F. Supp. 2d 1279 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 14, 2011

    Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from individual liability as long as their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … The second step in determining whether qualified immunity applies is whether the law was “clearly established.” Gonzalez, 325 F.3d at 1234 .

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Albert Hansen v. Ryan Aper

    Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 21, 2018

    App’x 479, 484 (6th Cir. 2015) (reviewing a denial of qualified immunity to determine whether a prisoner’s constitutional right was clearly established). … Indisputably, the right to be free from “excessively forceful handcuffing” is clearly established for qualified immunity purposes. Kostrzewa v. City of Troy, 247 F.3d 633, 641 (6th Cir. 2001); see also O’Malley v.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Amanda Reich v. City of Elizabethtown, Ky.

    945 F.3d 968 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 19, 2019

    Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages “unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’” … This brings me to the second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis—clearly established law.

    Cited 108 timesPublished
  • Ajala v. Tom

    658 F. App'x 805 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 22, 2016

    shown that their conduct violated clearly established law in 2007. … On appeal Ajala argues that the district court erred in granting qualified immunity to the Defendants because, he says, it was clearly established by 2007 that using restraints to inflict prolonged, unnecessary pain on a

    Cited 13 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.