Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.14s
942 F.2d 67 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Aug 19, 1991
The general rule of qualified immunity, set out in Harlow v. … Explaining the Harlow standard, the Court said that, [ujnless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the
Cited 166 timesPublished361 F. Supp. 2d 704 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 23, 2005
Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … If so — if the constitutional right was clearly established, the defendant cannot maintain the defense of qualified immunity. C.
Cited 1 timesPublishedFanning v. Montgomery County Children & Youth Services
702 F. Supp. 1184 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 29, 1988
Mason argues that he violated no clearly established right of the plaintiffs, and is therefore free from liability even under the less protective cloak of qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity The remaining question with respect to Mr. Mason is whether the plaintiffs have alleged a violation of a clearly established right of which Mr. Mason should have been aware.
Cited 14 timesPublishedCHS Industries, LLC v. United States Customs & Border Protection
653 F. Supp. 2d 50 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 10, 2009
. —, 129 S.Ct. 808, 815 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009), the Supreme Court gave a succinct overview of the qualified immunity doctrine: 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 would have known.”
Cited 8 timesPublishedKennedy Ex Rel. Gorton v. City of Ridgefield
439 F.3d 1055 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 6, 2006
immunity, and the issue appealed concerns whether the facts demonstrated a violation of clearly established law. … Southwest Airlines, 124 F.3d 1103,1107 (9th Cir.1997) (“[W]e have jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity where the appeal focuses on whether the defendants violated a clearly established
Cited 3 timesPublished907 F.3d 1052 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 1, 2018
right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation." … We conduct this inquiry against the backdrop of the Supreme Court's repeated (and recent) reminders "not to define clearly established law at a high level of generality" and with the understanding that qualified immunity
Cited 41 timesPublished332 F.3d 541 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 22, 2003
We will affirm a grant of summary judgment based on qualified immunity if the "conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v. … clearly established.
Cited 10 timesPublishedHuertas Morales v. Agosto-Alicea
278 F. Supp. 2d 164 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Aug 1, 2003
Qualified Immunity According to Defendants, the conduct of Juan Agosto Alicea is protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity because it was imminently reasonable and did not violate clearly established law. … The general rule regarding qualified immunity is that government officials are immune from suit and liability when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory authority or constitutional rights, which a reasonable
Cited 3 timesPublished391 F. Supp. 2d 457 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 28, 2005
Qualified Immunity In this case, Crouch seeks judgment on the pleadings on the basis that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Public officials performing discretionary functions enjoy immunity from suits for damages, provided their “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would
Cited 1 timesPublishedMonroe v. Arkansas State University
495 F.3d 591 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 26, 2007
qualified immunity and direct dismissal of the action. … Although the defendant bears the burden of proof for this affirmative defense, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the law was clearly established. Sparr, 306 F.3d at 593 .
Cited 344 timesPublishedJesus Hernandez v. Unknown Named Agents, et
785 F.3d 117 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 24, 2015
That is the chore of the first prong of the qualified-immunity test, which we do not address. The alleged right at issue was not clearly established, under these facts, in 2010. The judgment of dismissal is AFFIRMED. … We hold unanimously that Agent Mesa has qualified immunity from this suit for a Fifth Amendment substantive due process violation because he did not violate any clearly established rights flowing from that Amendment.
Vacated by Hernandez v. Mesa, 137 S. Ct. 2003 (2017)Cited 46 timesPublishedFrances Green v. Monmouth University (080612) (Monmouth County and Statewide)
237 N.J. 516 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 7, 2019
of immunity is decided once it is established that the entity itself is “charitable,” “religious,” or “educational.” … The panel found that the concerts were nevertheless “clearly ‘educational’ and ‘charitable’ within the intent of the Charitable Immunity Act.” Ibid.
Cited 79 timesPublishedDillon 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 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 timesPublished655 F. Supp. 2d 235 · District Court, W.D. New York · Sep 18, 2009
Qualified Immunity The moving defendants also argue, in the alternative, that plaintiffs claims against them should be dismissed on the ground of qualified immunity. … “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for damages resulting from the performance of discretionary official functions if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory
Cited 31 timesPublishedWilliam Wentworth Foster v. Mary Basham
932 F.2d 732 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 16, 1991
Basham also contended she was entitled to qualified immunity from suit. … Although subjective motive (or intent) is not relevant to the qualified-immunity analysis, the knowledge possessed by the defendant at the time the challenged action occurred is, along with the clearly established law as
Cited 9 timesPublishedRobbin Amanda Bayse v. Ted Philbin
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 1, 2025
Although the magistrate judge acknowledged that “the law can be ‘clearly established’ for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S. … “In this circuit, the law can be ‘clearly established’ for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S.
Cited 0 timesPublishedRoberto Valderrama v. Officer Carl Rousseau
780 F.3d 1108 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 16, 2015
The district court granted their motions in part, but it denied them qualified immunity as to several of the § 1983 claims. The officers now appeal the denial of qualified immunity as to Mr. … clearly established.
Cited 85 timesPublishedR.N. b/n/f of P.N. and R.N. individually v. Rogan
2017 DNH 044 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Mar 8, 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.” White v. Pauly, 137 S. … “To avoid a qualified-immunity defense, [the plaintiff] must show (1) that [the defendant] infracted his federal rights and (2) that these rights were so clearly established that a reasonable officer should have known
Cited 1 timesPublished995 F.2d 15 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 4, 1993
“Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages- As long as their conduct does not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right, they cannot be held liable.” … Where statutory language may be easily read to cover particular conduct, a prosecution based on that language does not lose immunity absent “clearly established” caselaw to the contrary.
Cited 36 timesPublished
Ask Donna