Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1976

10,000+ results

1.61s

  • Isbell v. Bellino

    983 F. Supp. 2d 492 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 25, 2012

    Due Process Claims and Qualified Immunity The qualified immunity inquiry requires further discussion. … Thus, absolute immunity is not applicable. C. Qualified Immunity. 1. Qualified Immunity Standard.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Freeman v. Gore

    483 F.3d 404 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 3, 2007

    denial of a public official’s motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity.”). … Third, the deputies assert that, in any event, they are entitled to 9 qualified immunity because their actions were not objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law.

    Cited 353 timesPublished
  • Flatford v. City of Monroe

    17 F.3d 162 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 22, 1994

    To withstand a motion for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity, the plaintiff must establish: (1) an alleged violation which implicates clearly established law, and (2) facts sufficient to create a genuine … require action in situations not implicating clearly established rights.

    Cited 69 timesPublished
  • Kelsey v. County of Schoharie

    567 F.3d 54 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 22, 2009

    As a result, it would be premature to determine whether Defendants Bates and Hazzard are responsible for violating clearly established constitutional law or are immune from suit under the qualified immunity doctrine. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

    Cited 49 timesPublished
  • Deezia v. City of Lincoln

    350 F. Supp. 3d 868 · District Court, D. Nebraska · Oct 29, 2018

    . ----, 136 S.Ct. 305 , 308, 193 L.Ed.2d 255 (2015) (specificity in defining clearly established law for qualified immunity purposes "is especially important in the Fourth Amendment context, where the Court has recognized … For qualified immunity purposes, the question then becomes whether the law at the time of the incident clearly established that the level of force used in this context constituted excessive force. Ehlers v.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Heitschmidt v. City of Houston

    161 F.3d 834 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 23, 1998

    clearly established Fourth Amendment rights, and (2) allege conduct that is objectively unreasonable. … With regard to his unlawful detention claim, Heitschmidt asserts his clearly established right to be free from unreasonable seizure of his person, a right which he maintains includes the clearly established right to be free

    Cited 73 timesPublished
  • Tellier v. Fields

    230 F.3d 502 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 1, 2000

    of clearly established rights. … Judge improperly rejected defendants’ qualified, immunity defense because Tellier failed to allege a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • McGarr v. City of Peekskill

    975 F. Supp. 2d 377 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 27, 2013

    Doctrine of Qualified Immunity “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 … Qualified immunity shields a defendant from standing trial or facing other burdens of litigation, “if either (a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Fogle

    819 F. Supp. 2d 23 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 18, 2011

    Qualified immunity is “a defense that shields officials from suit if their conduct ‘d[id] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Bame v. … "If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity." Id.

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Backlund v. Barnhart

    778 F.2d 1386 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 17, 1985

    those rights were clearly established at the time of the conduct at issue. … Davis extended the rule of qualified immunity to state officials. 104 S.Ct. at 3020 n. 12.

    Cited 184 timesPublished
  • Doyle v. Coombe

    976 F. Supp. 183 · District Court, W.D. New York · Aug 26, 1997

    Qualified Immunity Defendants have not raised qualified immunity as a basis for summary judgment. … “‘To defeat an official’s claim of qualified immunity, the individual’s right must have been clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.’ ” LaBounty, 1996 WL 711497 at *1 (citations omitted).

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Jose Zurita v. Richard Hyde

    665 F.3d 860 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 22, 2011

    Nevertheless, Biang would enjoy qualified immunity as to this claim if applicable law was not clearly established as of July 1, 2004. … In some cases, the district court may conclude that even under the facts presented by the defendant, the defendant’s actions violated clearly established law and qualified immunity does not apply.

    Cited 184 timesPublished
  • Samarco v. Neumann

    44 F. Supp. 2d 1276 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 4, 1999

    The clearly established law prong of the qualified immunity test many not be met through references to general propositions. See Lassiter, 28 F.3d at 1149-50 . … Substantiating Clearly Established Violations of the Fourth Amendment ■ To overcome qualified immunity, Samar-co must show that: (1) Deputy Christensen violated a federal constitutional right; and (2) that the right was clearly

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Lynch v. City of Boston

    989 F. Supp. 275 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 9, 1997

    A defense of qualified immunity ordinarily fails where the law that was violated was clearly established, “since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct.” … depends on the concept of a “clearly established” right.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Youngbear v. Thalacker

    174 F. Supp. 2d 902 · District Court, N.D. Iowa · Nov 8, 2001

    Qualified Immunity 1. … The qualified immunity defense should fail if the official violates a clearly established right, because “a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct.”

    Cited 33 timesPublished
  • Doe v. Southeast Delco School District

    140 F. Supp. 3d 396 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 13, 2015

    Qualified immunity shields government employees sued in their personal capacities from liability unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights ... which a reasonable person would have … Qualified immunity will protect Assistant Superintendent Ryan if Plaintiffs *404 have failed to allege he violated their constitutional rights or if Plaintiffs have alleged a violation of a right that was not clearly established

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Tonisha via v. Sandra Lagrand, a Dcp Investigator, in Her Individual Capacity

    469 F.3d 618 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 17, 2006

    See Jones, 425 F.3d at 460 (holding that a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity if the alleged constitutional right was not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation). … was not yet clearly established at the time of the investigation of Via.”

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Susan King v. Todd Harwood

    852 F.3d 568 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 27, 2017

    to qualified immunity. . . . … , because Defendants would lose qualified immunity only if they “recklessly or knowingly” violated King’s clearly established right to be free from malicious prosecution.

    Cited 254 timesPublished
  • Wayne Gerling v. Matthew Waite

    2 F.4th 737 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 23, 2021

    Qualified immunity protects officers from suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … When a defendant asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show that the defendant violated his constitutional right, and that the right was “clearly established” at the time of the incident.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Gale v. Thomas

    759 So. 2d 1150 · Mississippi Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1999

    Clearly, the City's immunity stems from the re-enactment of immunity by § 11-46-3. … Gale's argument regarding qualified immunity is misplaced. Gale seems to claim that the only manner in which Officer Thomas may receive immunity is through the application of qualified immunity.

    Cited 56 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.