Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
3.59s
352 F.3d 756 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 18, 2003
If the plaintiff fails to establish a constitutional violation, the qualified immunity inquiry ends and the plaintiff may not recover. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . … Was the law clearly established? Breen, relying on County of Sacramento v.
Cited 171 timesPublishedAngela Borrell v. Bloomsburg University
870 F.3d 154 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 30, 2017
Ficca is entitled to qualified immunity as long as she does not violate a “clearly established” constitutional or federal right. Sharp, 669 F.3d at 159 (quoting Saucier v. … And the district court cases cited cannot clearly establish law for qualified immunity purposes in any event. See Camreta v. Greene, 563 U.S. 692 , 709 n.7, 131 S.Ct. 2020 , 179 L.Ed.2d 1118 (2011).
Cited 106 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 timesPublished678 F. Supp. 2d 1093 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Jul 24, 2009
to qualified immunity. … issue of qualified immunity.
Cited 6 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 timesPublished233 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 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 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 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 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 timesPublished94 F.4th 475 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 29, 2024
Because of the disputed facts, and the clearly established law preventing officers from using deadly force after incapacitating an individual, the officer was precluded from qualified immunity. Id. at 339. … are material to the application of qualified immunity.
Cited 1 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 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 timesUnknown652 F.3d 886 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 30, 2011
Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … due process right that Fields asserts was clearly established when the events in this case took place.
Cited 52 timesPublished350 F. Supp. 2d 944 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Jun 4, 2004
Federal Claims and Qualified Immunity 1. General Principles Snell has pled the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … Under the second prong, the court must determine whether the applicable law was clearly established at the time of the challenged action, that is, whether the defendant would have violated a clearly established right under
Cited 2 timesPublishedMichael Chrestman v. Metro Gov't of Nashville & Davidson Cnty., Tenn.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 16, 2025
That this case comes to us at the motion-to-dismiss stage complicates our analysis of the clearly established prong of the officers’ qualified-immunity defense. … There, we explained that “dismissing for qualified immunity” on the clearly established prong “is sometimes difficult because the clearly established inquiry may turn on case-specific details that must be fleshed out in discovery
Cited 0 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 timesPublished79 F. Supp. 2d 1104 · District Court, D. Nebraska · Jan 12, 2000
Qualified immunity is a question of law. … See, e.g., Otey, 121 F.3d at 1155 (reversing denial of motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds; police chief did not violate clearly established federal rights of which a reasonable person would have known
Cited 9 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 timesPublished
Ask Donna