Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.45s
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 timesPublished474 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 timesPublishedMontgomery 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 timesPublished40 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 timesPublishedOrraca 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 timesPublishedLopez 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 timesPublishedSpringer 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 timesUnknown330 F. Supp. 2d 99 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Aug 16, 2004
“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields police officers acting in their official capacity from suits for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , unless their actions violate clearly-established rights of which an objectively … Since a constitutional violation could be shown, the court must proceed to the qualified immunity inquiry and ask whether the right violated was clearly established. See Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .
Cited 6 timesPublished809 F. Supp. 1185 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 13, 1992
In some cases, the qualified immunity issue may also turn on “the complementary question whether defendant had a clearly established duty towards plaintiff.” Ryan v. … What is “clearly established” law for qualified immunity purposes, however, commands only some, “not precise factual correspondence between relevant precedents and the conduct at issue.” Ryan, 860 F.2d at 1208 .
Cited 216 timesPublishedRogers v. Pocono Mountain East High School
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 5, 2022
The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that government officials performing “discretionary functions,” are shielded from suit if their conduct did not violate a “clearly established statutory or constitutional right … Ct. 2042, 2044 (2015) (“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
Cited 0 timesUnknownHerrera v. Santa Fe Public Schools
41 F. Supp. 3d 1027 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Aug 29, 2014
(“Robles has successfully established the violation of a clearly established right and therefore qualified immunity is not appropriate. … Clearly Established Rights in the Qualifíed Immunity Analysis.
Cited 6 timesPublished94 La.App. 4 Cir. 2140 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 13, 1995
Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages insofar as their Rconduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Qualified immunity does not act as an absolute bar, but rather as a threshold over which a plaintiff must pass to continue litigation.
Cited 1 timesPublished680 F. Supp. 2d 470 · District Court, W.D. New York · Jan 28, 2010
Qualified immunity shields public officials from an action for civil damages, to the extent that their challenged acts do not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … If a deprivation exists, qualified immunity is appropriate where:(l) the legal right said to be violated was not clearly established at the time of the defendant’s conduct; (2) the defendant’s action was objectively reasonable
Cited 6 timesPublished890 F. Supp. 2d 845 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 4, 2012
Qualified immunity protects state officials so long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Dickerson v. … Qualified immunity includes a two-step analysis: (1) considering the allegations in a light most favorable to the party injured, a constitutional right has been violated; and (2) whether that right was clearly established
Cited 1 timesPublished832 S.W.2d 450 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Jun 25, 1992
Regarding appellant’s section 1983 claim, appellees argue that “[the TDCJ employees] are entitled to qualified immunity.” Prison officials and officers may rely on qualified immunity in section 1983 actions. … To meet this burden, the plaintiff must estab *453 lish that the defendant’s conduct “violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Brown v.
Cited 9 timesPublished306 F.3d 1271 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 26, 2002
However, if we decide otherwise, we proceed to “ask whether the right was clearly established” at the time it was allegedly infringed. Id. … Appellants’ Claims of Qualified Immunity A. Qualified Immunity from Claims Arising out of the April 10, 1998 Arrest of Loria for OGA 1.
Cited 174 timesPublishedJim Maxwell v. County of San Diego
708 F.3d 1075 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 14, 2013
Qualified immunity protects government officers “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 known … To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, we ask, in the order we choose, (1) whether the alleged misconduct violated a right and (2) whether the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged
Cited 128 timesPublishedJoseph E. Birrell v. Robert Brown, Director, Michigan Dept. Of Corrections
867 F.2d 956 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 13, 1989
Upon reference, the magistrate reviewed the plaintiff’s allegations and reported in a twenty page recommendation that the defendants could not establish qualified immunity to insulate themselves under the circumstances. … A prison official’s motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity should be denied only when he acts intentionally, or when his alleged actions violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would
Cited 107 timesPublishedJill 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 timesPublished657 F. Supp. 2d 1263 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Aug 24, 2009
This is so because the motions to dismiss plainly must be granted anyway based on qualified immunity. Qualified immunity protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” Malley v. … The defendants thus have qualified immunity. See, e.g., Anderson v.
Cited 1 timesPublished
Ask Donna