Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1862

10,000+ results

1.67s

  • Schaefer v. Whitted

    121 F. Supp. 3d 701 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Aug 5, 2015

    “Qualified immunity protects public officials from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right.” Brumfield v. … However, to surmount qualified immunity, Plaintiff has the burden of demonstrating the Second Amendment right Officer Whitted is alleged to have violated is “clearly established” in the more “particularized sense,” such that

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Kenneth B. Krohn v. United States of America

    742 F.2d 24 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Sep 28, 1984

    Further, we are cognizant that qualified immunity differs from absolute immunity in that it is not so readily decided by motion; obviously, on some occasions officials possessing only qualified immunity must stand trial. … Briscoe established an absolute immunity from section 1983 suit for a police officer/witness.

    Cited 103 timesPublished
  • Ryan Steinhoff v. Matthew Malovrh

    Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 24, 2026

    The district court further concluded that Detective Kowalczyk was entitled to qualified immunity because Steinhoff did not identify clearly established law “prohibiting the use of a takedown under the dynamic cir- cumstances … As for the second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry, a constitutional right is clearly established if existing prece- dent “place[s] the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate.” Rivas-Villegas v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Smith v. Tolley

    960 F. Supp. 977 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Apr 4, 1997

    Baker, 825 F.2d 772, 774 (4th Cir.1987). 22 This is because “... there are two levels on which the immunity shield operates. First, the particular right must be clearly established in the law. … Therefore, Tolley is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • 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
  • McLean v. McElhaney

    289 Mich. App. 592 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 26, 2010

    under MCL 691.1407(5) or qualified immunity under MCL 691.1407(2). 10 Odom v Wayne Co, 482 Mich 459, *605 479-480 ; 760 NW2d 217 (2008). … We note that if the trial court determines that Harma was entitled to absolute immunity under MCL 691.1407(5), it need not also determine whether he was entitled to qualified immunity under MCL 691.1407(2).

    Cited 51 timesPublished
  • Williams v. CITY OF FRANKLIN, TENN.

    586 F. Supp. 2d 890 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Nov 18, 2008

    If the plaintiff has established a violation of a constitutional right, the second step in the qualified immunity analysis is to determine whether the violated right was clearly established. Id. … was clearly established); Boger v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Liebe v. Norton

    157 F.3d 574 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 1, 1998

    "Qualified immunity shields government officials from suit unless their conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known." Yowell v. … To withstand the application of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must assert a violation of a constitutional or statutory right; that right must have been clearly established at the time of the violation; and, given the facts

    Cited 111 timesPublished
  • McCabe v. Caleel

    739 F. Supp. 387 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 30, 1990

    action is a violation) violates a clearly established right. … Application of the qualified immunity concept to McCabe’s situation is simple: It has not been “clearly established” even now, let alone when Board’s members acted back in the late 1970s, that the fact (if it is a fact) of

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Randall Fennell v. Matthew Gregory

    414 F. App'x 32 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 31, 2011

    violated a constitutional right; and (2) whether the right was clearly established in light of the circumstances of this case. … established for qualified immunity purposes.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Mooneyham v. BOARD OF CHIROPRACTIC EX'RS

    802 So. 2d 200 · Supreme Court of Alabama · May 11, 2001

    The defendants argue that they are immune from suit as to this claim because, they say, Mooneyham has not alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. We agree. … The threshold question for determining whether the doctrine of qualified immunity applies to a given constitutional claim is whether the plaintiff has alleged the violation of a clearly recognized constitutional right.

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • McLin v. Twenty-First Judicial Dist

    79 F.4th 411 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 16, 2023

    “Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability in their individual capacity so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … immunity analysis to address first.38 Our inquiry starts and ends with the clearly established prong, whether Chief Judge Morrison violated a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 41 timesPublished
  • Alston v. City of Detroit Police Officer

    District Court, E.D. Michigan · Feb 15, 2024

    conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’” … They develop no argument as to the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • James Carver, Administrator of the Estate of David Allen Carver, Deceased v. City of Cincinnati

    474 F.3d 283 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 18, 2007

    repeatedly without ever becoming clearly established. … Therefore, the law was not clearly established at the time of the alleged constitutional violation. III. CONCLUSION The Cincinnati police officers and EMTs are entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Cleavinger v. Saxner

    474 U.S. 193 · Supreme Court of the United States · Dec 10, 1985

    To be sure, the line between absolute immunity and qualified immunity often is not an easy one to perceive and structure. … Petitioners state that they have not challenged — although they do not concede— the ruling that they violated “clearly established constitutional rights” of respondents. See Brief for Petitioners 7, n. 8.

    Cited 1,056 timesPublished
  • Weaver v. Brenner

    40 F.3d 527 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 26, 1994

    Clearly Established Right 23 The threshold issue in deciding whether a public official is entitled to qualified immunity is, as noted, whether the federal right was clearly established at the time the alleged violation occurred … the relevant rights to have been clearly established in 1989 is affirmed.

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • Montgomery v. Board of County Commissioners

    637 F. Supp. 2d 934 · District Court, D. Colorado · Jun 5, 2009

    Plaintiff further argues that “qualified immunity should be denied, because it is clearly established that a State may not discharge an employee on a basis that infringes that employee’s constitutionally-protected interest … Turning to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, I must determine whether Plaintiffs First Amendment right was clearly established at the time of the violation.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Orraca Figueroa v. Torres Torres

    288 F. Supp. 2d 176 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Oct 14, 2003

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Defendants have moved for summary judgment, alleging that they are immune from suit under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … The general rule regarding qualified immunity is that government officials are immune from suit and liability when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory authority or constitutional rights, which a reasonable

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Jordan v. New Jersey Department of Corrections

    881 F. Supp. 947 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 31, 1995

    The court also determined, however, that the prison guard was entitled to qualified immunity because the prisoner’s legal right was not “clearly established” at the time the action was taken. … established” to strip defendant Fowler of qualified immunity.

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Lopez Quinonez v. PUERTO RICO NAT. GUARD

    488 F. Supp. 2d 112 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · May 18, 2007

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity shields public officials performing discretionary functions from civil damages, so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights, of which … We have used a three-prong analysis for evaluating qualified immunity claims.

    Cited 3 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.