Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
6.04s
Clifton v. Borough of Eddystone
824 F. Supp. 2d 617 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 7, 2011
A state official with qualified immunity has no civil liability for discretionary conduct so long as he does “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Furthermore, the right to be free from the use of excessive force in the course of handcuffing is clearly established and is not defeated by qualified immunity. Id. at 778 . Plaintiff was not subject to excessive force.
Cited 13 timesPublished858 F. Supp. 902 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jul 21, 1994
In such cases, courts are required to determine whether the alleged actions violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … To decide whether an official is protected by qualified immunity, a court must determine whether the official’s action was objectively legally reasonable in the light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the
Cited 3 timesPublishedA.M. ex rel. Youngers v. New Mexico Department of Health
108 F. Supp. 3d 963 · District Court, D. New Mexico · May 15, 2015
Clearly Established Rights in the Qualified-Immunity Analysis. … with the prior case law and granted qualified immunity for lack of clearly established law.
Cited 1 timesPublished227 F. Supp. 2d 889 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Oct 10, 2002
The plaintiff argues that the defendant is not entitled to the qualified immunity defense because the law was clearly established that the Federal Wiretap Act preempted state law. … While these authorities provide some interesting insight, they are not relevant for purposes of determining qualified immunity as to whether the law was clearly established in this circuit with respect to the defendant’s
Cited 2 timesPublishedJohn Griswold v. Trinity Health Michigan
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 11, 2026
“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.” Kisela v. … But it was not clearly established that the circumstances leading to his death satisfied the objective prong of the Farmer test. The jail officials therefore are entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesPublishedScott R. Rushing v. Estate of Ernest R. Mincey
599 F.3d 1263 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 16, 2010
“[Q]ualified 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 … 3 were clearly established at the time the officer acted.”
Cited 51 timesPublished495 Mich. 1 · Michigan Supreme Court · Feb 6, 2014
Among them is § 4(a) of the MMMA, which immunizes registered qualifying patients from “penalty in any manner” for specified MMMA-compliant medical marijuana use. MCL 333.26424(a). … The City seems to suggest that, for this immunity to attach, a registered qualifying patient must show a “demonstrated need” under MCL 125.3207 for his or her MMMA-compliant medical marijuana use.
Cited 106 timesPublishedIn Re COVID-Related Restrictions on Religious Services
Superior Court of Delaware · Aug 28, 2023
“[E]ven where the law is clearly established and the scope of an official’s permissible conduct is clearly defined,” the qualified immunity defense may still shield officials from liability.84 “[I]f it was objectively … clearly established right.
Cited 0 timesPublished910 F. Supp. 790 · District Court, D. Maine · Nov 9, 1995
To overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must first allege a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Id. … Second, if the right is clearly established, qualified immunity will only be denied if a reasonable official should have known that the challenged conduct violated that established right.
Cited 16 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Sep 30, 2019
Qualified Immunity 4 Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil liability under 42 U.S.C. 1983 if 5 “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Prunty, 108 F.3d 251, 14 254-55 (9th Cir. 1997) (in qualified immunity context, finding no clearly established right to be 15 free from feigned karate chops towards inmate’s body, including groin area).
Cited 0 timesUnknown647 F. Supp. 2d 1178 · District Court, C.D. California · Jul 16, 2009
Defendants’ Qualified Immunity Defense Is Denied Defendants have moved to dismiss the Complaint in its entirety on the ground that they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate clearly established federal … To be protected under qualified immunity, a government employee must show that the right the plaintiff complains of was not clearly established at the time the defendants acted or, assuming that it was clearly established
Cited 2 timesPublished860 S.W.2d 500 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Jul 1, 1993
To meet this burden, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant’s conduct “violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Brown v. … Reviewing appellant’s pleading under this standard, his allegations are sufficient to allege that Collins violated his clearly established eighth amendment rights.
Cited 65 timesPublished560 F.3d 1012 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 25, 2009
“If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.” Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . … Under Saucier’s second prong, we ask “whether the right was clearly established.” Id.
Cited 185 timesPublished218 F.3d 1267 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 20, 2000
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FOR THE INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS Qualified immunity shields government officials from both suit and liability if their conduct violates no clearly established right of which a reasonable person would have … As indicated in our elaboration above of the qualified immunity standard, pre-exist-ing law must clearly establish the alleged constitutional right.
Cited 115 timesPublishedDenise MARKHAM, Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Francis E. WHITE, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants
172 F.3d 486 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 31, 1999
Qualified Immunity A defendant raising a claim of qualified immunity is not directly attacking the merits of a plaintiffs claim. … Furthermore, this principle was sufficiently well established that it required the denial of the defendants’ qualified immunity motion in the Nabozny case. Id.
Cited 51 timesPublished583 A.2d 949 · Supreme Court of Delaware · Nov 5, 1990
The State Tort Claims Act grants, in part, general qualified immunity to certain state officials and employees. 10 Del.C. § 4001. … We have already recognized that a public defender is protected by qualified immunity under the State Tort Claims Act. See Vick v.
Cited 133 timesPublishedWestfahl v. District of Columbia
District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 4, 2015
Qualified Immunity Defendants first contend that Officer Robinson is entitled to qualified immunity with respect to Westfahl’s excessive-force claim. … “Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff” shows “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’
Cited 0 timesPublishedNation v. State, Dept. of Correction
144 Idaho 177 · Idaho Supreme Court · Mar 29, 2007
violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … Next, did the conduct of the party asserting qualified immunity violate a clearly established right of the party claiming the violation? Finally, was the conduct of the party asserting qualified immunity reasonable?
Cited 57 timesPublishedMary Estep v. Police Officer Mackey
639 F. App'x 870 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 12, 2016
This “collateral-order doctrine” allows us to review certain orders that deny a defendant’s motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds because qualified immunity “is an immunity from suit rather than a mere … Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which
Cited 9 timesUnpublishedSteven Gillman v. City of Troy, Mich.
126 F.4th 1152 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 22, 2025
Qualified Immunity Green-Hernandez begins by contesting the district court’s order denying her motion for summary judgment on her qualified immunity defense. … “A public official is entitled to qualified immunity at summary judgment when, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the challenged conduct did not violate ‘clearly established . . . constitutional
Cited 11 timesPublished
Ask Donna