Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1951

10,000+ results

4.22s

  • Bell v. Dawson

    144 F. Supp. 2d 454 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 20, 2001

    As discussed above, government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from *461 liability for civil damages to the extent that “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … [Qualified immunity is an immunity from suit, and not merely a defense to liability....

    Cited 10 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
  • Shipp v. McMahon

    199 F.3d 256 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 7, 2000

    ’s assertion of qualified immunity. … Thus, courts engage in a two-step analysis to address claims of qualified immunity. *262 First, to show that a right is clearly established, the plaintiff does not have to refer to precedent that is directly on point, or

    Cited 42 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
  • Ricciuti v. Gyzenis

    832 F. Supp. 2d 147 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Dec 28, 2011

    Finally, the individual defendants claim qualified immunity, arguing that their conduct was not prohibited by clearly established law at the time of Ms. Ricciuti’s termination. … There is no small irony in the fact that the Second Circuit’s qualified immunity case law is itself not "clearly established.”

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Miguel Gutierrez v. Michael Kermon

    722 F.3d 1003 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 12, 2013

    Qualified immunity affords an even greater level of protection by shielding officers from “suit for damages if ‘a reasonable officer could have believed [the arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the … does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’”

    Cited 91 timesPublished
  • Henry E. Parrish Yvonne L. Parrish v. Donald Mallinger Richard Larkin Crispus Nix

    133 F.3d 612 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 7, 1998

    Qualified immunity shields prison officials from damage liability unless they “violate clearly es tablished statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Whether a broad constitutional right such as due process is “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes is a particularized inquiry: The contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official

    Cited 53 timesPublished
  • Riebsame v. Prince

    267 F. Supp. 2d 1225 · District Court, M.D. Florida · May 9, 2003

    Deputy Prince is entitled to qualified immunity from Count III of Rieb-same’s complaint. Riebsame has not shown that Deputy Prince violated any clearly-established constitutional or statutory law. … Riebsame has not proved that Sheriff Williams violated any clearly-established constitutional or statutory right. No genuine issue of material fact remains as to Sheriff Williams’ qualified immunity. D.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Green v. Brantley

    719 F. Supp. 1570 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Jan 20, 1989

    to qualified immunity. … According to Anderson , qualified immunity requires not only a finding that general legal principles were clearly established, but also a finding that the law was clearly established with such particularity that a reasonable

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Elliott v. Cheshire County, NH

    750 F. Supp. 1146 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Nov 9, 1990

    Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … the defendants qualified immunity.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Montana v. Patterson

    894 S.W.2d 812 · Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler) · Dec 28, 1994

    Appellees claimed qualified or “good faith” immunity to actions brought under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 , and cited Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). … Once the Appellees have asserted the qualified immunity and established that the alleged wrongful acts were taken within the scope of their discretionary authority, the burden then shifts to the Appellant to show that qualified

    Cited 146 timesPublished
  • Baptist v. O'LEARY

    742 F. Supp. 975 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 11, 1990

    Qualified Immunity No such trial will be necessary here, though, because defendants must prevail on their affirmative defense of qualified immunity. As Harlow v. … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Perry v. Mendoza

    83 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
  • McCormick v. City of Lawrence

    325 F. Supp. 2d 1191 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jun 24, 2004

    Even if the court were to proceed to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, the court would determine that it is not clearly established that Plaintiffs were- engaging in protected speech. … See Camfield, 248 F.3d at 1228 (citing Tonkovich, 159 F.3d at 530 (holding that qualified immunity was proper when the plaintiff failed to cite any case law showing that the law was clearly established)).

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Troy Lee Douthit v. Clarence Jones, Sheriff, Dallas County, Texas, and W. H. McCallum

    619 F.2d 527 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 20, 1980

    The Qualified Immunity Defense. … Thus the immunity defense is not available to officials if the constitutional right allegedly infringed by them was clearly established at the time of their challenged conduct, if they knew or should have known of that right

    Cited 137 timesPublished
  • Shipp v. McMahon

    234 F.3d 907 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 31, 2000

    ’s assertion of qualified immunity. … Thus, we find that Shipp articulates a clearly established right under the minimum requirements of Rule 12(b)(6).3 Under the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, the plaintiff must show that the defendant

    Overruled on other grounds by Peter Clayton McClendon v. City of Columbia, City of Columbia James R. Carney, 305 F.3d 314 (2002)Cited 128 timesPublished
  • J.C. Bass v. United States Department of Agriculture

    737 F.2d 1408 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 6, 1984

    The crux of Bass’s argument to the court during this discussion was that if it were shown that the defendants had violated clearly established law, the defendants would be unable to rely upon qualified immunity as a defense … Since a question of fact existed as to whether the defendants had violated clearly established law, the district court properly gave instructions on qualified immunity based on the contingency that the jury might find that

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • Wilson v. State

    84 Wash. App. 332 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 20, 1996

    A plaintiff seeking to rebut a defendant’s claim of qualified immunity must demonstrate that the defendant’s conduct interfered with a clearly established constitutional right. White, 78 Wn. App. at 837 . … Thus, Wilson has failed to show that defendants interfered with his "clearly established” constitutional free speech rights. Consequently, the individual defendants may claim the defense of qualified immunity.

    Cited 60 timesPublished
  • Slay v. Marion County Sheriff's Department

    603 N.E.2d 877 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Nov 23, 1992

    IV We next address the issue of qualified immunity. … Jones argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity. 6 In particular, he con *887 tends that the rights in question were not "clearly established" when the shooting occurred, in May of 1982. While Tennessee v.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Lockard v. CITY OF LAWRENCEBURG, IND.

    815 F. Supp. 2d 1034 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 6, 2011

    In the end, the Seventh Circuit did not reach the clearly established prong for purposes of determining qualified immunity. Id. at 377 . Moreover, at the time of Mr. … Nonetheless, the district court granted summary judgment in favor of defendant, relying on the “clearly established” qualified immunity prong. Id.

    Cited 1 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.