Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

10,000+ results

1.46s

  • Putnam v. Davies

    169 F.R.D. 89 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 26, 1996

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Both Plaintiff and Defendants have moved for summary judgment on the issue of the availability of qualified immunity to shield Defendants from liability for damages. … 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 person

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Brittany Ruffin v. Kevin Davis

    Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 29, 2026

    qualified immunity.” … The “right need not be recognized by a court in a specific factual context before such right may be considered ‘clearly established’ for purposes of qualified immunity.” Wilson v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Casteel v. Pieschek

    3 F.3d 1050 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 23, 1993

    Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “public officials performing discretionary functions are protected against suits from damages unless their' conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … To determine the applicability of qualified immunity, the defendants’ actions must be compared to what a reasonable official would believe was required in light of the clearly established legal rules regarding county jail

    Cited 332 timesPublished
  • Austrian v. Burlington

    Vermont Superior Court · Aug 13, 2024

    “The outcome of the inquiry depends on the objective reasonableness of an official’s conduct, as measured by reference to clearly established law.” Id. … Donovan, 2012 VT 27, 1 6 n.2, 191 Vt. 412 ("The fate of an official with qualified immunity depends upon the circumstances and motivations of his actions, as established by the evidence at trial.' .

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Munjoy Sporting & Athletic Club v. Dow

    2000 Me. 141 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 21, 2000

    “A public official claiming qualified immunity ... must establish either that he or she did not -violate the plaintiffs rights or that given the state of the law a reasonable official would not have understood that he [or … A right is clearly established if “the contours of the right [are] sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that- right.

    Cited 31 timesPublished
  • Bagg v. University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston

    726 S.W.2d 582 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 8, 1987

    However, to protect officials from groundless section 1983 suits, the federal courts have recognized what is known as qualified good faith immunity. … “[Government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

    Overruled — as noted by a later courtCited 136 timesPublished
  • Peter Bistrian v. Troy Levi

    912 F.3d 79 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 28, 2018

    Qualified immunity, again, was not available because the right to be free from punitive detention was already clearly established at the time. Id. at 707. … Once again, qualified immunity was not justified, the Court said, because the right against retaliation was clearly established at the time. Id. at 711-12.

    Abrogated by Egbert v. Boule, 596 U.S. 482 (2022)Cited 275 timesPublished
  • City of Prosser v. Teamsters Union Local 839

    Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 19, 2022

    Martin, 195 F.3d 1208, 1218 (10th Cir. 1999) (holding that the relevant law was “clearly established” in the post-October 1994 time frame for purposes of defendant’s claim of qualified immunity); cf. Sampson v. … and by officials acting under color of state law. 7 Article I, section 12 states: “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Tidik v. Ritsema

    938 F. Supp. 416 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Jul 12, 1996

    Their duties clearly qualify as adjudicative or prosecutorial. … To overcome a claim of qualified immunity under section 1983, the plaintiff must show a violation of a constitutionally protected right, and that the protected right is so clearly established that “a reasonable official would

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Vives v. City of New York

    305 F. Supp. 2d 289 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 24, 2003

    Are the Detectives Entitled to Qualified Immunity? … Coughlin, 137 F.3d 68, 74 (2d Cir.1998) (reversing grant of qualified immunity where the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation, but there was some doubt as to whether a “reasonable official would

    Reversed in part by Vives v. City of New York, 405 F.3d 115 (2004)Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Conner v. Tate

    130 F. Supp. 2d 1370 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Feb 9, 2001

    In Lassiter , the Eleventh Circuit held that for a law to be clearly established in the qualified immunity context, “preexisting law must dictate, that is truly compel (not just suggest or allow or raise a question about) … as clearly established law.

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • Long v. L'ESPERANCE

    166 Vt. 566 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Jul 11, 1997

    The protection from suit afforded a state employee such as defendant is qualified, not absolute: defendant is entitled to qualified immunity if he was “(1) acting during [his] employment and acting, or reasonably believing … As a general matter, good faith exists if the “official’s acts did not violate clearly established rights of which the official reasonably should have known.” Murray v.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Currier v. Doran

    242 F.3d 905 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 1, 2001

    Because Plaintiffs have alleged a clearly established constitutional claim against Defendants Doran and Gonzales, these Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity; this court therefore affirms the district court … Clearly Established Law Once defendants raise the defense of qualified immunity, the plaintiff must demonstrate to the court that the law on which the plaintiff relies was clearly established at the time of the defendants

    Cited 321 timesPublished
  • Smith v. Robinson

    456 F. Supp. 449 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 6, 1978

    Under the circumstances, the “clearly established right” aspect of Wood v. Strickland is unavailing to plaintiff here, and defendants’ assertion of qualified immunity must therefore prevail. … With respect to the equal protection claim, however, plaintiff does not even suggest that prior decisions delineate a “clearly established” right that would defeat defendants’ assertion of qualified immunity.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Crawford v. Columbus State Community College

    196 F. Supp. 3d 766 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 11, 2016

    Qualified Immunity The defendants’ qualified-immunity argument similarly lacks merit. 3 Defendants argue that because there was no “clearly established law supporting Crawford’s attempt to assert an age discrimination claim … Accordingly, the Court will only address the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis — whether that right was "clearly established.”

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Vogt v. McIntosh County Board

    98 F.4th 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 15, 2024

    Even though Plaintiff has shown a genuine issue of material fact that Defendant violated Plaintiff’s constitutional right, Defendant may still receive qualified immunity if the right alleged was not clearly established … Thus, controlling precedent clearly established Plaintiff’s violated right at the time of the violation and Plaintiff has satisfied both requirements to defeat a claim of qualified immunity at summary judgment.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • SER City of Bridgeport v. Hon. John Lewis Marks, Jr., Judge

    233 W. Va. 449 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 27, 2014

    “The ultimate determination of whether qualified or statutory immunity bars a civil action is one of law for the court to determine. … City of Huntington, 198 W.Va. 139, 479 S.E.2d 649 (1996), absolute statutory immunity, like qualified immunity, “is an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability” that “is effectively lost if the case is

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Krinitt v. Idaho Department of Fish & Game

    162 Idaho 425 · Idaho Supreme Court · Jul 11, 2017

    Krinitt opposed the motion, arguing: (1) IDFG was not Perry’s statutory employer and therefore did not qualify for statutory immunity; and (2) even if IDFG was Perry’s statutory employer, IDFG had waived its statutory immunity … Here, IDFG qualifies as a category one statutory employer of Perry. The “Service Level Agreement” between IDFG and the DOI clearly shows IDFG contracted with the DOI to secure aviation services.

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Ex Parte Sawyer

    876 So. 2d 433 · Supreme Court of Alabama · Sep 5, 2003

    and the § 1983 claim against her on the basis of qualified immunity. … and qualified immunity.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Burnett v. Bottoms

    368 F. Supp. 2d 1033 · District Court, D. Arizona · May 2, 2005

    Qualified Immunity Defendants contend that the doctrine of qualified immunity shields them from Plaintiffs § 1983 claims. … If the right is not clearly established, the individual public officials are entitled to qualified immunity if a reasonable official could have believed that his or her conduct was lawful. Thompson v.

    Cited 4 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.