Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.74s
233 F. Supp. 2d 301 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Nov 13, 2002
Even where the plaintiffs, federal rights and the scope of the official’s permissible conduct are clearly established, the qualified immunity defense protects a government actor if it was objectively reasonable for him to … violate” clearly established constitutional rights).
Cited 25 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 timesPublishedOscar F. Sanchez Liliana Sanchez v. Charles Swyden, Inspector, Warren K. Hayward, Officer
131 F.3d 1144 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 13, 1998
We disagree, go no further than step one of the qualified immunity analysis, and conclude that Sanchez has not shown that the defendants deprived him of a clearly established constitutional right. In Baker v. … CONCLUSION Finding that Sanchez has not shown that he has been deprived of a clearly established constitutional right, we hold that all defendants named in Sanchez’s § 1983 suit are entitled to qualified immunity as a matter
Cited 6 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 timesPublishedAllen v. City & County of Honolulu
39 F.3d 936 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 28, 1994
immunity because he had not violated “clearly established” federal law. … The Supreme Court had clearly established an inmate’s right of access to a law library well before the time covered by Allen’s complaint. See Bounds v.
Cited 12 timesPublished548 F.3d 613 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 1, 2008
In considering a motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, the court makes two inquiries. … “If so, then [the court] determine[s] whether the constitutional right was clearly established at the time.” Flowers, 478 F.3d at 872 .
Cited 332 timesPublishedWilliams v. Ontario County Sheriff's Department
662 F. Supp. 2d 321 · District Court, W.D. New York · Sep 21, 2009
Qualified immunity shields law enforcement officials who perform discretionary functions from liability if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable prison … to qualified immunity.
Cited 1 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 4, 2022
Qualified Immunity 20 The defense of qualified immunity protects “government officials ... from liability for 21 civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate … based on qualified immunity is appropriate.
Cited 0 timesUnknown98 F.4th 1022 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 17, 2024
Officer Bailey counters by asserting qualified immunity. A. Mr. Bustillos must prove the violation of a clearly established right. … Once a defendant asserts qualified immunity, “the plaintiff must establish (1) the defendant violated a statutory or constitutional right and (2) that right was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s
Cited 7 timesPublished857 F. Supp. 2d 599 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Apr 24, 2012
Qualified Immunity 3 “Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages to the extent that ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … The Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.
Reversed by Bobby Bland v. B. Roberts, 730 F.3d 368 (2013)Cited 4 timesPublished166 F. Supp. 3d 144 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 29, 2016
Defendant seeks summary judgment' due to qualified immunity as well as on the merits. a. … That right has been clearly established by the U.S. Supreme Court for decades.
Cited 10 timesPublished55 F.4th 101 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 30, 2022
immunity because such a right was not clearly established at the time of the scholarship’s termination. … In short, the district court concluded that the “lack of clearly established law under the Fraser standard” entitled Coach Tsantiris and AD Manuel to qualified immunity on the First Amendment claim. Id. at 111.
Cited 105 timesPublished
Ask Donna