Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1836

10,000+ results

9.56s

  • Davis v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 512

    335 F. Supp. 3d 1230 · District Court, D. Kansas · Aug 15, 2018

    Qualified Immunity Defendants assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity because at the time of the alleged violation, the law did not clearly establish that reassigning plaintiff to teach at SMW constituted adverse … To defeat the qualified immunity defense, plaintiff must show that on the facts of this case, the law clearly established that the reassigning her to teach at SMW constituted adverse employment action.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • McColley v. County of Rensselaer

    740 F.3d 817 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 21, 2014

    Such a denial of qualified immunity is reviewed by this Court to determine whether “the qualified immunity defense may be established as a matter of law.” Escalera v. … . it was objectively reasonable for him to believe that his action did not violate clearly established law.”

    Cited 33 timesPublished
  • Daniel v. City of Colorado Springs

    327 P.3d 891 · Supreme Court of Colorado · May 19, 2014

    While a vehicle is not absolutely necessary to play golf, a parking lot next to a golf course clearly promotes golfing. … City & Cnty. of Denver, 13 P.3d 794, 799 (Colo.2000) (taking the allegations in the complaint as true for the purposes of determining whether the injured party established that a public entity waived immunity under the CGIA

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • Wynn v. Morgan

    861 F. Supp. 622 · District Court, E.D. Tennessee · Jul 8, 1994

    However, the Sixth Circuit noted, the defendants may assert the defense of qualified immunity to the extent that their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … were “clearly established” at the time the actions were taken.

    Cited 10 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
  • Pesek v. City of Brunswick

    794 F. Supp. 768 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 2, 1992

    right asserted is clearly established. … violated a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 17 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • CAREPARTNERS, LLC v. Lashway

    545 F.3d 867 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 25, 2008

    If the right was not clearly established at the time of the violation, the official is entitled to qualified immunity. 6 Id. A. … Therefore, the First Amendment rights advanced by CarePartners were clearly established for the purpose of evaluating the State employees’ qualified immunity defense.

    Cited 64 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • Michael O'Connell v. Christopher Thieneman

    Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Dec 19, 2025

    Thus, in addition to proving each of these elements, O’Connell’s qualified official immunity imposes upon Thieneman the additional burden of showing that the Law Day remarks … Rather, our decision is based solely on the application of qualified immunity. -6- BRIEFS FOR APPELLANT: BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Joseph Klausing Alan J.

    Cited 0 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.