Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1866

10,000+ results

2.23s

  • Minnis v. Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University & Agricultural & Mechanical College

    972 F. Supp. 2d 878 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Sep 18, 2013

    To achieve this balance, qualified immunity shields government officials from liability when they perform discretionary functions provided that their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … immunity because they do not clearly violate any of Minnis’s constitutional rights.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Aucoin v. Haney

    306 F.3d 268 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 1, 2002

    to support Haney politically in his campaign for District Attorney; if the law was not clearly established, then the district court erred, and Haney is entitled to qualified immunity and the dismissal of the complaint … Haney therefore is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 43 timesPublished
  • Crowson v. Washington County State, Utah

    983 F.3d 1166 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 29, 2020

    Merits Analysis “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … We therefore proceed directly to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis: whether the violation was clearly established.9 See 9 Mr. Crowson asserts that Dr.

    Cited 153 timesPublished
  • Smith v. Kenny

    678 F. Supp. 2d 1093 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Jul 24, 2009

    to qualified immunity. … issue of qualified immunity.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Morgan Hansen v. Thomas Black

    872 F.3d 554 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 18, 2017

    To defeat summary judgment based on qualified immunity, Hansen must point to facts showing both that she suffered a violation of a constitutional or statutory right and that the right was clearly established at the time of … Even assuming a constitutional violation, Trooper Black is entitled to qualified immunity because his conduct did not violate a clearly established Fourth Amendment right.

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Lory Lombardo v. John F. Harvey, Sandy Jenkin, Cathy Smolkovich

    865 F.2d 259 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 12, 1988

    of the clearly established law and information he possessed). 9 Procedurally, this Circuit has placed the burden on the plaintiff once the issue of qualified immunity is raised: 10 Where a defendant official is entitled … to qualified immunity, the plaintiff must plead facts which, if true, describe a violation of a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable public official, under an objective standard would

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Derek Thomas v. Jacqueline Carmichael

    Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 23, 2026

    To defeat a qualified immunity defense, in addition to showing that the defendant official was deliber- ately indifferent to the plaintiff’s serious medical need, the plaintiff must establish that the right was clearly established … plaintiff’s clearly established right.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Derek Thomas v. Jacqueline Carmichael

    Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 23, 2026

    To defeat a qualified immunity defense, in addition to showing that the defendant official was deliber- ately indifferent to the plaintiff’s serious medical need, the plaintiff must establish that the right was clearly established … plaintiff’s clearly established right.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Cope v. Coleman County

    Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 26, 2024

    In order to overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show: (1) the defendant violated the plaintiff’s constitutional rights, and (2) “the right at issue was clearly established at the time of [the] defendant’s alleged … ’s holding of Monroe in a cell containing a phone cord did not violate a clearly established constitutional right.”); id.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Kiser v. Garrett

    67 F.3d 1166 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 20, 1995

    In September 1993, the child protective services functions of DHS were constitutional rights were not clearly established at the time in issue, the appellees are shielded by qualified immunity. … Louisiana's conclusion that the right to family integrity is not clearly established.

    Cited 35 timesPublished
  • Hafley v. Lohman

    90 F.3d 264 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 3, 1996

    We note that "qualified immunity is an affirmative defense," and "it will be upheld on a 12(b)(6) motion only when the immunity is established on the face of the complaint." Id. … The defendants in this case are entitled to qualified immunity unless Hafley has alleged the violation of a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. Id.

    Cited 66 timesPublished
  • Hassan Ex Rel. Hassan v. Lubbock Independent School District

    55 F.3d 1075 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 27, 1995

    Questions of law are reviewed ... de novo."5 In examining the claims of qualified immunity on summary judgment, we first inquire whether Hassan has alleged "the violation of a clearly … The determination whether a right is "clearly established" is a more particularized inquiry than Hassan suggests; otherwise, plaintiffs could "convert the rule of qualified immunity ... into a rule of virtually unqualified

    Cited 108 timesPublished
  • United States v. Albert Tantalo

    680 F.2d 903 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 3, 1982

    Defense counsel urged that since the appellant had provided immunized testimony before the grand jury, the Government was called upon to present evidence to the court to establish not only an independent basis for the indictment … The district court’s ruling which upheld the indictments, without calling upon the government to establish that the evidence it proposed to present at the trial was untainted by the appellant’s immunized testimony, was in

    Disagreed with in part by United States v. Adrian Pielago, Maria Varona, 135 F.3d 703 (1998)Cited 52 timesPublished
  • Guite v. Wright

    976 F. Supp. 866 · District Court, D. Minnesota · Sep 25, 1997

    Claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Any individual government officials performing discretionary functions have a qualified immunity defense to a Section 1983 claim for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … in the home, the entry violated clearly established law which a reasonable officer should have known.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Smith v. Mattox

    127 F.3d 1416 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 19, 1997

    immunity grounds to the extent the appeal concerns pure issues of law, such as whether the law was clearly established); Cottrell v. … An official sued as an individual is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct "does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."6 A reasonable official's

    Cited 204 timesPublished
  • Kindra O'Bryant v. DCP&P

    Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 16, 2026

    If the specific right was not clearly established, the official is entitled to qualified immunity. Id. A. … established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Mallin v. City of Eastlake

    755 F. Supp. 2d 819 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 29, 2010

    Violation of a Clearly Established Right Thompson may still be entitled to qualified immunity if Mallin’s right to be free from having his face slammed into a car and being choked was not clearly established at the time of … Because Mallín failed to carry his burden of proving that a reasonable officer should have known that Gonzales’s actions violated a clearly established right, the Court must grant Gonzales qualified immunity as a matter of

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Dijon Sharpe v. Winterville Police Department

    59 F.4th 674 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 7, 2023

    When the stop occurred, it was not clearly established that the officer’s actions violated the passenger’s First Amendment rights. So qualified immunity bars that claim. I. … Walker, A Qualified Defense of Qualified Immunity, 93 NOTRE DAME L.

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • Levon Brooks v. Steven Hayne

    860 F.3d 819 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 27, 2017

    asks whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.” 10 4 Brooks’ state law claims against Dr. … Qualified immunity is a complete defense, and Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity unless Plaintiffs can show triable issues as to whether Defendants violated a clearly established

    Cited 21 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

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.