Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1851

10,000+ results

1.35s

  • Victoria v. City of San Diego

    326 F. Supp. 3d 1003 · District Court, S.D. California · Sep 5, 2018

    In suits under § 1983, qualified immunity "shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged … In general, 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

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Brooks v. Northwood Little League, Inc.

    327 S.C. 400 · Court of Appeals of South Carolina · Jun 9, 1997

    Some courts have focused on the nature of the land itself and have established prerequisites to immunity, namely that the land qualifying for protection is: (1) rural, (2) undeveloped, (3) appropriate for the type of activities … The plain language of our recreational use statute’s provisions clearly protects the Respondents because it grants immunity to “landowners.” 7 S.C.Code Ann. §§ 27-3-10 to 27-3-70; see also T.W.

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Hogan v. Pataki

    953 F. Supp. 22 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 15, 1997

    Moreover, qualified immunity protects a defendant even where the right in question was clearly established if it was objectively reasonable for the defendant to believe the acts did not violate that right. … Naturally, then, in so far as the individually named defendants are concerned, they are entitled to qualified immunity in that their conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • James v. Price

    602 F. Supp. 843 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 21, 1985

    Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), a government official performing a discretionary function is shielded by qualified immunity unless his actions violated “clearly established statutory or … Operating on the assumption that the right to be free from malicious prosecution was not a clearly established right, we found that the *846 state officers in this case were entitled to rely on the qualified immunity defense

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Rodriguez v. Laredo Independent School District

    82 F. Supp. 2d 679 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 2, 2000

    Superintendent Cruz CV Qualified Immunity .In Harlow v. … ’s actions did not violate ... clearly established First Amendment rights.”).

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Sheffield v. Pieroway

    361 F. Supp. 3d 160 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 22, 2019

    Qualified Immunity Resil asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity, which plaintiff opposes. … Qualified Immunity Pieroway contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Brumley v. Utah State Tax Commission

    220 Utah Adv. Rep. 45 · Utah Supreme Court · Sep 2, 1993

    However, a plaintiff who seeks damages for violation of a constitutional or statutory right may overcome the defendant officials’ qualified immunity only by showing that those rights were clearly established at the time of … Because the constitutional rights in question were not “clearly established” during the twenty-day period, we find no error in the district court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ civil rights action on the ground of qualified immunity

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Eberhardinger v. City of York

    341 F. Supp. 3d 420 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 17, 2018

    Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects a state actor who has committed a constitutional violation if the plaintiff's rights were not "clearly established" when the individual acted. See Pearson v. … The Supreme Court of the United States has repeatedly admonished that, when analyzing qualified immunity, courts should not "define clearly established law at a high level of generality."

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Wright v. Dee

    54 F. Supp. 2d 199 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 28, 1999

    A state actor is qualifiedly immune where his actions did not violate rights that a reasonable person would have known were clearly established. Stuto v. Fleishman, 164 F.3d 820, 825 (2d Cir.1999). … Defendants assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established at the time of Wright’s disciplinary hearing that assignment to the SHU for three years and the loss of good time credits

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Tillman v. Coley

    703 F. Supp. 1571 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Jan 18, 1989

    denial of defendant’s claim of good faith or qualified immunity. … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • State v. Jones

    416 S.C. 283 · Supreme Court of South Carolina · May 18, 2016

    In a pretrial motion, Jones asserted immunity from prosecution under the "Protection of Persons and Property Act" (the Act).1 Following a hearing, the circuit court judge granted the motion, finding Jones established by … Conclusion We conclude the circuit court judge properly granted Jones immunity from prosecution pursuant to section 16-11-440(C) because Jones's residence qualified as "another place" where she had the right to be

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • Alexander v. City of Bessemer

    142 So. 3d 543 · Supreme Court of Alabama · Oct 18, 2013

    to so-called “qualified immunity” under federal law. … It is only “when an official’s conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known’” that ‘the official is not protected by qualified immunity.’ Id.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Powell v. Basham

    921 F.2d 165 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 11, 1990

    On the First Amendment claim, defendants argued, inter alia, that they were entitled to qualified immunity because Powell’s First Amendment right to criticize the promotion system and practices had not been clearly established … Qualified immunity shields a public official from personal liability for constitutional violations “if his conduct was objectively reasonable as measured by clearly established law.” Darnell v.

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Springer v. Seventh Judicial District Court

    District Court, D. New Mexico · Feb 9, 2024

    “Qualified immunity ‘protects governmental officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Hunter, 669 F.3d 937, 939-40 (9th Cir. 2012) (“Qualified immunity is only an immunity from a suit for money damages, and does not provide immunity from a suit seeking declaratory or injunctive relief.”); Yates v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Buchanan v. City of Milwaukee

    290 F. Supp. 2d 954 · District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Oct 27, 2003

    Qualified Immunity Sullivan argues that even if he violated plaintiffs Fourth Amendment rights summary judgment must be granted on the basis of qualified immunity. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials performing discretionary functions “generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Avila v. Butt Thornton & Baher, P.C.

    New Mexico Court of Appeals · Jun 10, 2025

    officers are protected by qualified immunity. … qualified immunity is available to BTB cannot be upheld.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Daboul v. Board of Visitors of the College of William & Mary

    64 Va. Cir. 499 · Norfolk County Circuit Court · Apr 10, 2002

    action is a violation) violates a clearly established right. … Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery. ...

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Jeremy Nelson v. County of Wright James R. Hudek

    162 F.3d 986 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 10, 1998

    Government officials performing discretionary tasks are entitled to qualified immunity unless their actions violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … The standard was clearly established. 5 Whether Hudek is entitled to qualified immunity must be examined from the perspective of the situation as he understood it at the time. Anderson v.

    Cited 47 timesPublished
  • Flores v. City of Palacios

    381 F.3d 391 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 10, 2004

    STEP TWO: OBJECTIVE REASONABLENESS IN LIGHT OF CLEARLY ESTABLISHED LAW For a right to be clearly established under the second step of the qualified immunity analysis, “[t]he contours of … the qualified immunity analysis.

    Cited 357 timesPublished
  • Jill S. N. Schaffer v. Bryan Beringer

    842 F.3d 585 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 21, 2016

    -4- Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability unless their conduct “violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a … Thus, the qualified immunity analysis is divided into two prongs: (1) whether the facts alleged establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right; and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time

    Cited 50 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.