Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1851

10,000+ results

4.36s

  • Colon-Andino v. Toledo-Davila

    634 F. Supp. 2d 220 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jul 13, 2009

    “In administering the [Supreme] Court’s test, this circuit has tended to list separately the two sub-parts of the ‘clearly established’ prong along with the first prong and, as a result, has articulated the qualified immunity … Defendants offer what is clearly a template ("boiler plate”) summary of the law on qualified immunity that is outdated- and fails to apply the qualified immunity analysis to the facts of this case adequately.

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Griess v. Colorado

    841 F.2d 1042 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 15, 1988

    The Supreme Court has indicated that when the issue with which we are concerned, i.e,, whether constitutional rights allegedly violated were “clearly established” for purposes of qualified immunity under Harlow v. … Because the test for qualified immunity turns on whether a right is clearly established, courts should ordinarily determine the existence and character of the underlying constitutional violation(s) before proceeding to the

    Cited 132 timesPublished
  • Babcock v. State

    116 Wash. 2d 596 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 4, 1991

    Lack of malice is necessary but not sufficient to establish qualified i immunity under Guffey . Caseworkers cannot claim even a qualified immunity when they fail to follow statutory procedures. … We do not think that ex parte orders can establish quasi-judicial immunity for those carrying them out. Ex parte orders do not offer sufficient procedural protections to warrant the establishment of absolute immunity.

    Cited 126 timesPublished
  • ELENE H. v. County of Los Angeles

    220 Cal. App. 3d 1445 · California Court of Appeal · May 2, 1990

    Defendants contend that their conduct was totally immunized and, if not totally immunized, was within the range of qualified immunity for law enforcement officers recognized by federal law. (Malley v. … Clearly the behavior of a law enforcement officer which is grossly incompetent or demonstrates knowing disregard for established legal rights is not protected by qualified immunity. *1454 In the case at bench, the defendants

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Gurski v. State Police Dept.

    242 N.J. Super. 148 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 4, 1990

    action is a violation) violates a clearly established right. … Plaintiffs would be able to convert the rule of qualified immunity that our cases plainly establish into a rule of virtually unqualified liability simply by alleging violation of extremely abstract rights.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Angel Mendez v. County of Los Angeles

    897 F.3d 1067 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 27, 2018

    The officers could not benefit from qualified immunity, because at the time of the incident, case law had clearly established that the officers’ entry was unlawful. Mendez v. … The law on all these points was clearly established at the time, so the officers could not obtain qualified immunity for their unlawful search. Id. at 1191.

    Cited 69 timesPublished
  • Robbins v. Regents of University of California

    25 Cal. Rptr. 3d 851 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 16, 2005

    The trial court agreed that Suris was entitled to immunity, finding there was no evidence of a constitutional violation (and even if there was such a violation, it was not one of clearly established law), by virtue of LaVine … If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquires concerning qualified immunity.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Comair, Inc. v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Airport Corp.

    295 S.W.3d 91 · Kentucky Supreme Court · Oct 1, 2009

    Despite the frequency of opinions on the subject from this Court, the law of sovereign immunity, and the related doctrines of governmental immunity, official immunity, and qualified official immunity, is still difficult to … Under this test, the Court concluded, “our constitutional fathers would not view this activity as qualifying for sovereign immunity.” Id.

    Cited 69 timesPublished
  • Williams v. Kaufman County

    86 F. Supp. 2d 586 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 7, 2000

    Conversely, an official’s conduct is not protected by qualified immunity if, in light of clearly established pre-existing law, it was apparent the conduct, when undertaken, would be a violation of the right at issue. … Before this standard, the parameters of this right were not clearly established or defined. Since these parameters were not clearly defined in April 1995, Sheriff Harris is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Michael 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 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
  • Wesby v. District of Columbia

    816 F.3d 96 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 8, 2016

    We and the dissent agree on two other clearly established points of law. 1. … As discussed in the court’s opinion and in the text, supra 98-99, that is a misstatement of clearly established law.

    Reversed by District of Columbia v. Wesby, 138 S. Ct. 577 (2018)Cited 16 timesPublished
  • J.M.R. v. County of Talladega

    686 So. 2d 209 · Supreme Court of Alabama · Nov 27, 1996

    . § 1983 , the defendants raised qualified immunity as a defense. … Under the qualified immunity defense to § 1983 actions, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Niles v. Town of Wakefield

    172 F. Supp. 3d 429 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 24, 2016

    Qualified Immunity ■ The First Circuit recently described the contours of the qualified immunity defense in detail as follows: The rules for granting qualified immunity are well established, “The doctrine of qualified immunity … ” subject to qualified immunity).

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Hanse v. Phillips

    276 Ga. App. 558 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Nov 29, 2005

    Supreme Court has held that “qualified immunity is an entitlement not to stand trial rather than a mere defense to liability.” Id. at 124 (1). … And this “provides persuasive reasons for resolving the issue of... qualified immunity as early as possible in the legal proceedings.” Id.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Transcare Maryland, Inc. v. Murray

    431 Md. 225 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 22, 2013

    The County noted that, while the firefighter was clearly immune under the Good Samaritan Act, “[t]he volunteer fire department, however, is a private nonprofit corporation which does not appear to have the statutory immunity … Act, regardless of whether the company’s employee may qualify for immunity under the statute.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Eidson v. Owens

    515 F.3d 1139 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 13, 2008

    Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … But if a violation can be shown, we must then consider whether the right was clearly established. Id. A.

    Cited 37 timesPublished
  • Sweatt v. Blackman Township Officer Brent Doxtader

    986 F. Supp. 2d 886 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Dec 11, 2013

    The doctrine of qualified immunity generally protects “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … excessive force. 4 The Court finds that this right was clearly established.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Misty Kingsland v. City of Miami

    382 F.3d 1220 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 31, 2004

    “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly 11 We recall that probable cause requires that “‘ … “Once the defendant establishes that he was acting within his discretionary authority, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that qualified immunity is not appropriate.” Id.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Ferris v. County of Kennebec

    44 F. Supp. 2d 62 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 5, 1999

    Failure to State a Claim and Qualified Immunity 1. … Qualified Immunity Sprowl’s contention that her, liability is precluded by qualified immunity is similarly unpersuasive.

    Cited 11 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.