Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.46s
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 timesPublished938 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 timesPublished148 F. Supp. 3d 395 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 24, 2015
The right in question was clearly established, such that qualified immunity is unwarranted. ‘ Defendants argue that Officer Jones is entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutional right allegedly violated was not … clearly established at the time Officer Jones acted.
Cited 14 timesPublishedCity 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 timesUnpublished166 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 timesPublished305 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 timesPublished130 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 timesPublished456 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 timesPublished242 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 timesPublished106 F.3d 582 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 6, 1997
51 We hold, therefore, that an official who performs an act clearly established to be beyond the scope of his discretionary authority is not entitled to claim qualified immunity under § 1983. … established for qualified immunity purposes."
Cited 205 timesPublished98 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 timesPublishedCrawford 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 timesPublished689 F. Supp. 874 · District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Jul 27, 1988
The Court has carved out a qualified immunity for government officials whose “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Therefore, the defense of qualified immunity is not available to defendants. See Forrester v.
Cited 49 timesPublishedWest Virginia Lottery v. A-1 Amusement, Inc.
807 S.E.2d 760 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 13, 2017
Therefore, even if the State purchases a policy of insurance, a state agency and its official may claim immunities under the common law, such as qualified immunity. 70 Pursuant to this analysis, qualified immunity is available … qualified immunity in this context.
Cited 11 timesPublishedKrinitt 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 timesPublishedSER 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 timesPublishedJacob Todd, etc. v. John R. Smith
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 10, 1997
At this early stage, qualified immunity would be granted only if immunity is established on the face of the complaint. Id. … Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 232 (1991) (whether federal right has been violated is "necessary concomitant" of whether right was clearly established and objectively discernible).
Cited 0 timesUnpublished368 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 timesPublished547 F.3d 890 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 14, 2008
Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … the plaintiffs clearly established federal rights.”
Cited 16 timesPublished83 F.4th 313 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 29, 2023
To overcome qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show that the officer (1) violated a constitutional right that was (2) clearly established at the time. Laviage v. Fite, 47 F.4th 402, 405–06 (5th Cir. 2022). … Even assuming those decisions stand for that categorical proposition (which we need not decide), they are too far afield from the present case to clearly establish the law for qualified immunity purposes.
Cited 10 timesPublished
Ask Donna