Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1881

10,000+ results

1.43s

  • James Meyer v. Lana J. Robinson, Individually and as a Police Officer of the City of Lawrence

    992 F.2d 734 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 6, 1993

    The court adopted the following rule: “The question determining the existence of qualified immunity is whether a reasonable person could have believed the defendants’ actions to be lawful in light of clearly established law … Under the Harlow standard, qualified immunity should be granted when the official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • Oden v. Reader

    935 S.W.2d 470 · Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler) · Nov 26, 1996

    To be entitled to summary judgment on the affirmative defense of qualified official immunity, Oden must establish that: (1) his position as county attorney has quasi-judicial status; (2) it was within his authority as county … Thus, the first two prongs of the qualified immunity defense have been proven by Oden.

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Jackson v. Long

    102 F.3d 722 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 17, 1996

    issue whether the federal right allegedly infringed was `clearly established.'" … This contention raises the legal questions of whether Sheriff Long violated any clearly established constitutional rights of plaintiffs in responding to the inmate's complaint against them and, if the law clearly established

    Cited 50 timesPublished
  • Broam v. Bogan

    320 F.3d 1023 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 25, 2003

    a criminal investigation either does not violate a federal constitutional right, or the constitutional right was not clearly established on the date of the alleged violation. … not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.'"

    Cited 250 timesPublished
  • Kellough v. Bertrand

    22 F. Supp. 2d 602 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 25, 1998

    Qualified Immunity Bars Plaintiff’s Claim of Excessive Force Established law clearly provides that Plaintiff has a Fourth Amendment right to be free from the use of excessive force by police. … Plaintiffs Claim of Unlawful Arrest is not Barred by Qualified Immunity An individual has a clearly established right to be free from unlawful arrest. Duckett v. City of Cedar Park, 950 F.2d 272, 278 (5th Cir.1992).

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Yost v. Wilhoit

    District Court, E.D. Tennessee · Nov 8, 2021

    Defendant Wilhoit also asserts qualified immunity as a defense. … It is well established that a plaintiff has the burden to defeat qualified immunity once it has been raised.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Bradley L. McCloud C. Calvin Skaates Terrence B. Cohen Gloria Jean Morgan Vernon E. Hysell v. Joseph W. Testa,defendant-Appellant

    227 F.3d 424 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 8, 2000

    “If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct.” Id. at 818-19 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 . … He is not, however, clearly entitled to summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity at this stage. Ill For the foregoing reasons, the district court’s denial of Testa’s motion for summary judgment is AFFIRMED.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Moore v. Dormin

    252 A.D.2d 421 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 16, 1998

    As for qualified privilege, the plaintiff clearly did not raise a triable issue as to the defendant’s motivation, under either the constitutional or the common-law definition of malice. … Defendant raised the bar of absolute and qualified immunity based on his capacity as a prosecutor and the official context of the statements, arguing that the communication was made by one law-enforcement official to another

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Rozek v. Topolnicki

    865 F.2d 1154 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 12, 1989

    The court held that defendants Reisdorff and Liddle were entitled to qualified immunity because they were working under Topolnicki's direction, and that Rozek had not shown they had violated any clearly established constitutional … We need not reach the question of whether defendant Topolnicki was entitled to summary judgment on the defense of prosecutorial immunity for all of his actions, because the record clearly reflects his entitlement to qualified

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Madonna Sterling, of the Estate of Marcus Anthony Wayman v. Borough of Minersville F. Scott Wilinsky, Police Officer Thomas Hoban, Police Officer Joseph Wilinsky, Police Chief, Individually and as Police Officers for the Borough of Minersville Officer F. Scott Wilinsky and Officer Thomas Hoban

    232 F.3d 190 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 14, 2000

    The court further ruled that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity since their conduct violated Wayman's clearly established right to privacy as protected by the Constitution. 7 Officers Hoban and Wilinsky … II. 8 We have previously set forth the analytical framework for deciding qualified immunity claims. First, we must determine if the plaintiff has alleged a deprivation of a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 42 timesPublished
  • Ryle Edward Springmen v. Alexandra Williams

    122 F.3d 211 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 18, 1997

    Furthermore, qualified immunity lies unless there has been a clear violation of well established constitutional law. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as then-conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

    Cited 43 timesPublished
  • Joyner v. Greiner

    195 F. Supp. 2d 500 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 28, 2002

    POINT III DEFENDANTS ARE ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from civil suits arising from performance of their discretionary functions so long as their conduct “does not violate clearly … Whether an offi *508 cial may invoke qualified immunity “generally turns on the ‘objective legal reasonableness’ of the action ... assessed in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ ” when the action was

    Cited 50 timesPublished
  • Cesar v. Achim

    542 F. Supp. 2d 897 · District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Mar 27, 2008

    The burden of proving the existence of a clearly established constitutional right is on the plaintiff, and it is a heavy one because qualified immunity is designed to shield from civil liability “ ‘all but the plainly incompetent … Moreover, I do not believe qualified immunity is appropriate at this time, as Achim’s alleged conduct, viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff, could amount to a violation of a clearly established constitutional right

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Edwards v. Gilbert

    867 F.2d 1271 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 28, 1989

    Once a defendant advances a defense of qualified immunity, he is entitled to summary judgment unless “the legal norms allegedly violated by the defendant were clearly established at the time of the challenged actions_” Mitchell … established” for purposes of qualified immunity at the time of Molbert’s death.

    Modified on other grounds by Edwards v. Okaloosa County, 23 F.3d 358 (1994)Cited 130 timesPublished
  • Castillo v. City of Weslaco

    388 F.3d 464 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 13, 2004

    Finding that the Officers sufficiently alleged a violation of clearly established federal law, the district court denied the Appellants’ motion for summary judgment asserting qualified immunity and scheduled the case for … II Qualified immunity is appropriate if “the defendant’s actions were ‘objectively reasonable’ with reference to ‘clearly established law’ at the time of the conduct in question.” Petta v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • State v. McQueen

    293 Mich. App. 644 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 23, 2011

    In addition, § 4(i) provides immunity for a “person” who assists a registered qualifying patient with “using or administering marihuana.” … Defendants do not claim immunity on the basis of being in the vicinity of the medical use of marijuana; they claim immunity on the basis of their assistance to registered qualifying patients with “using or administering”

    Cited 35 timesPublished
  • Derrell E. Upton v. Bernie C. Thompson, Individually and in His Capacity as Sheriff of Kankakee County, Jack L. Thulen v. Marvin Bausman, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Carroll County, Illinois

    930 F.2d 1209 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 22, 1991

    The district court concluded such rights were clearly established and denied the Sheriff's motion for summary judgment. Sheriff Thompson appeals the denial of qualified immunity. 8 II. … established in 1986 the sheriffs in these cases are protected by qualified immunity.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Hyburnia Husband v. Charles Bryan and Larry Saurage

    946 F.2d 27 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 28, 1991

    Violation of Clearly Established Law “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields a police officer from liability for civil damages when a reasonable officer could have believed that the challenged conduct did not violate … clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.”

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Majdalani v. Auburn University (CONSENT)

    District Court, M.D. Alabama · Sep 26, 2024

    prong of qualified immunity. … to qualified immunity” by establishing that the Defendant violated a right that was clearly established at the time of the violation).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

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.