Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1976

10,000+ results

2.33s

  • John Young v. Mercer County Commission

    849 F.3d 728 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 27, 2017

    “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 … “[C]ourts may grant qualified immunity on the ground that a purported right was not ‘clearly established’ by prior case law, without resolving the often more difficult question whether the purported right exists at all.”

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Harrison v. Director of Department of Corrections

    194 Mich. App. 446 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 1, 1992

    Highest executive officials may qualify for absolute immunity because they have broad-based jurisdiction or extensive authority similar to that of a judge or legislator. Chivas, supra, p 471 . … Therefore, the trial court properly granted defendants Brown and Johnson summary disposition pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(7) based upon governmental immunity. 1 The remaining individual defendants do not qualify as "highest executive

    Cited 36 timesPublished
  • Bombard v. Volp

    44 F. Supp. 3d 514 · District Court, D. Vermont · Sep 8, 2014

    Qualified Immunity Officer Volp has also moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … An assertion of qualified immunity requires a court to determine “(1) whether plaintiff has shown facts making out [a] violation of a constitutional right; (2) if so, whether that right was ‘clearly established’; and (3)

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Wray v. Painter

    791 F. Supp. 2d 419 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 2011

    Qualified Immunity In his Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendant asserts he is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate a clearly established law of which a reasonable officer in his position would have known … The Right Was Clearly Established at the Time of the Violation Under the second prong of the qualified immunity test, the Court must determine whether the right violated was clearly established at the time of the violation

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Charles D. Cronen v. Texas Department of Human Services, Jean Roberts, Ann Valdez-Haines, Donna L. Burns, Socorro Alonzo, and the State of Texas

    977 F.2d 934 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 23, 1992

    granted qualified immunity from damage suits. … If defendants refused to follow well-established federal regulations, they would violate clearly established rights.

    Cited 71 timesPublished
  • Rebecca Judge v. City of Lowell

    160 F.3d 67 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 18, 1998

    The Court specifically reserved judgment on the question whether its “qualified immunity jurisprudence would require a heightened pleading in eases involving individual government officials.” Id. … “This option exists,” the Court went on to state, “even if the official chooses not to plead the affirmative defense of qualified immunity.”

    Overruled on other grounds by Educadores Puertorriqueños en Acción v. Hernández, 367 F.3d 61 (2004)Cited 136 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
  • Villarreal v. City of Laredo

    44 F.4th 363 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 12, 2022

    The district court dismissed her First Amendment infringement claim against various officials on qualified immunity grounds, finding that any violation was not clearly established at the time. … of clearly established law.

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Dexter Harmon v. Officer Dexter Payne, Assistant Director, Arkansas Department of Correction; Officer James Gibson, Warden, Varner Unit; Officer James Shipman, Deputy Warden, Varner Unit; Officer Yolanda Clark, Food Service Department; Officer Laquista Swopes, Correctional Officer

    592 S.W.3d 619 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 16, 2020

    Under that standard, Appellees are entitled to statutory immunity unless they transgress “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” See Rainey v. … The factual allegations within the complaint failed to establish an exception to sovereign immunity and avoid statutory immunity.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Dillon Bracken v. Kinchung Chung

    869 F.3d 771 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 23, 2017

    Qualified Immunity We first address whether Chung may invoke the doctrine of qualified immunity. “There are two questions that must be answered” when an officer seeks qualified immunity. Jensen v. … CHUNG 7 is available generally, we must determine whether [the officer] is entitled to it in this case,” i.e., whether the officer “violated a clearly established constitutional . . . right.”

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Brothers v. Monaco

    363 F. Supp. 3d 1138 · District Court, D. Montana · Jan 28, 2019

    Qualified immunity insulates public 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 … Under § 1983, a law enforcement officer is entitled to qualified immunity unless: (1) the officer violated a constitutional right; and (2) that constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Perdomo v. City of League City, TX

    Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 7, 2026

    To overcome an officer’s qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff “must allege facts showing that the officer[] (1)‘violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of … established or otherwise, we do not reach the clearly established law prong of qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • TULLIS v. KNIGHT

    District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 9, 2023

    Additionally, even if a reasonable jury could find an Eighth Amendment violation, the Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds because Tullis has not shown a clearly established right to … Pauly. 137 S.Ct. 548, 551 (2017) ("Qualified immunity attaches when an official's conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Doe v. Marsh

    918 F. Supp. 580 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 19, 1996

    Finally, the court notes that qualified immunity protection turns on the “ ‘objective legal reasonableness’ ” of the allegedly unlawful official action “assessed in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ … Accordingly, in this case the court cannot grant the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity predicated upon the lack of a clearly established constitutionally protected right.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Barkes Ex Rel. Barkes v. First Correctional Medical, Inc.

    766 F.3d 307 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 5, 2014

    See id. at 678 (“In the context of determining whether there is a violation of clearly established law to overcome qualified immunity, purpose rather than knowledge is required to impose Bivens liability on the subordinate … “Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”

    Reversed on other grounds by Taylor v. Barkes, 135 S. Ct. 2042 (2015)Cited 659 timesPublished
  • Yang v. City of Brooklyn Park

    194 F. Supp. 3d 865 · District Court, D. Minnesota · Jul 6, 2016

    Qualified immunity protects a police officer from personal liability in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action unless the officer’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right. Winslow v. … When a party moves for summary judgment on the ground of qualified .immunity, “ ‘[t]he party asserting immunity always has the burden to establish the relevant predicate facts, and at the summary judgment stage, the nonmoving

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Weaver v. Brenner

    40 F.3d 527 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 26, 1994

    Clearly Established Right The threshold issue in deciding whether a public official is entitled to qualified immunity is, as noted, whether the federal right was clearly established at the time the alleged violation occurred … relevant rights to have been clearly established in 1989 is affirmed.

    Cited 42 timesPublished
  • Maxwell v. Henry

    815 F. Supp. 213 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 19, 1993

    Nuchia has filed a motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity. … In cases where a Defendant asserts qualified immunity as a defense, plaintiffs are held to a higher standard and must plead with particularity all facts establishing a right to recovery, including those which negate the qualified

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Higgs v. District Court In & For the County of Douglas

    713 P.2d 840 · Supreme Court of Colorado · Dec 2, 1985

    Qualified immunity provides a governmental official performing a discretionary function with an entitlement to immunity from liability upon a showing that the challenged conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory … The applicability of qualified immunity will turn “primarily on objective factors — that is, the objective reasonableness of an official’s conduct, as measured by reference to clearly established law.”

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Mata Ex Rel. J.A.M v. City of Farmington

    791 F. Supp. 2d 1118 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Jun 13, 2011

    Once the plaintiff has established the inference that the defendant’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right, a qualified immunity defense generally fails. See Cannon v. … They argue that Mata thus cannot satisfy his burden under the qualified immunity test and show that Rahn’s actions violated a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 7 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.