Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1831

10,000+ results

4.06s

  • Williams v. County of Alameda

    26 F. Supp. 3d 925 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 10, 2014

    An officer will receive qualified immunity if a reasonable officer could have believed the action to be lawful, in 'light of clearly established law and the information the officer possessed. Id. … Even an officer who reasonably, but mistakenly, believed that his conduct did not violate a clearly established constitutional right will receive qualified immunity. See Saucier, 533 U.S. at 205-206, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

    Cited 38 timesPublished
  • Margaret Byers v. Gordon Painter

    Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 17, 2026

    The burden of establishing qualified immunity rests on the party seeking the shield of that immunity. Id. … “That means that we may grant qualified immunity [solely] on the ground that the purported right was not clearly established[.]” Id.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Johnnie Savory v. Allen Andrews

    Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 14, 2026

    The officers in this case are entitled to qualified immunity only if their interrogation techniques did not violate Savory’s clearly established right to due process. Rivas-Villegas v. … Regardless, focusing on this difference is too myopic an approach given that Savory need only present similar—not identical—cases to satisfy qualified immunity’s “clearly established” requirement.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Burge v. Ferguson

    619 F. Supp. 2d 1225 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 16, 2008

    established Fourth Amendment right. 12 Accordingly, qualified immunity is unavailable at this stage. … But see Thomas, 463 F.3d at 293-94 (concluding that “a plaintiff has no obligation to plead a violation of clearly established law in order to avoid dismissal on qualified immunity grounds.”). 8 ."

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Heggs v. Grant

    73 F.3d 317 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 22, 1996

    On the appeal of a nonfinal order denying qualified immunity, we have jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine to decide whether the conduct complained of violated "clearly established statutory or … No clearly established law required him to take further measures to protect her.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Bethune-Hill v. Virginia State Board of Elections

    114 F. Supp. 3d 323 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · May 26, 2015

    Gillock, the Supreme Court acknowledged its grant of “common-law absolute immunity from civil suit” to state legislators in Tenney v. Brandhove, but qualified its holding. Id. at 372 , 100 S.Ct. 1185 . … The state legislative privilege — like state legislative immunity — likewise may become qualified based on the nature of the claim at issue.

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • Rettele v. Los Angeles County

    186 F. App'x 765 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 21, 2006

    Having determined that Plaintiffs’ factual allegations, if true, may establish a constitutional violation, we turn our attention to whether the law was clearly established, such that a reasonable officer would have known … to qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Christopher Lee Prosser v. Davis L. Ross, Co I

    70 F.3d 1005 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 1, 1995

    Ross is entitled to qualified immunity unless he violated Prosser’s “clearly established” constitutional rights. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982); Johnson v. … Ross is therefore entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law.

    Cited 109 timesPublished
  • Charles Ivey v. Pat Hamlin

    Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Mar 18, 2002

    violate the clearly established constitutional or statutory rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … When a defendant asserts a qualified immunity defense in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, the burden is on the plaintiff to show that the rights he or she is asserting have been clearly established. Perkins v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Gustafson v. Thomas

    75 F. Supp. 3d 876 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 16, 2014

    City of Chic., 865 F.2d 827 , 846 (7th Cir. 1989) (examining only cases decided before the events at issue in analyzing how clearly established the law was for qualified immunity). … Whatever the implications of potential violations of Illinois law, these alleged violations have no bearing on whether the law was clearly established for qualified immunity purposes. .

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • 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
  • Trulock v. Freeh

    275 F.3d 391 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 28, 2001

    The district court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss, holding that the Defendants, having violated no clearly established law, were entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

    Cited 721 timesPublished
  • Marquez v. Gutierrez

    322 F.3d 689 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 6, 2003

    The qualified immunity inquiry has two parts: "(1) Was the law governing the state official's conduct clearly established? (2) Under that law could a reasonable state official have believed his conduct was lawful?" … Further, Marquez argues that a prison official cannot act maliciously and sadistically while, at the same time, reasonably believing that his actions conform to clearly established law.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Hatheway v. Thies

    335 F.3d 1199 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 18, 2003

    In arguing that they are entitled to qualified immunity, the detectives contend that (1) the law was not clearly established as to whether Mr. … Denial of Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity is available to government officials when “their -11- conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Harris v. Board of Education

    105 F.3d 591 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 23, 1997

    Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity from "liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … him his salary and benefits violated clearly established law.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Hogan ex rel. J.H. v. County of Lewis

    929 F. Supp. 2d 130 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 8, 2013

    The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials acting in their capacity from liability for civil damages as long as their conduct does not “violate clearly-established rights of which an objectively reasonable … The party invoking qualified immunity bears the burden of offering proof that it was objectively reasonable for her to believe that her actions did not violate a clearly established right and that she is entitled to qualified

    Cited 2 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
  • Ciolino v. Eastman

    128 F. Supp. 3d 366 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 3, 2015

    Second Prong: Clearly Established Right The disputes of fact discussed above also preclude the Court from finding that the constitutional rights allegedly violated were not “clearly established,” such that Defendants would … be entitled to qualified immunity on the second prong of the test.

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Donna Lowe v. Town of Fairland, Oklahoma Beverly Hill Don Jones Shirley Mangold and Loretta Vinyard

    143 F.3d 1378 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 14, 1998

    Consequently, when the qualified immunity defense is raised, the defendant should be spared the burden of proceeding with the litigation until the plaintiff establishes that the defendant’s alleged actions violated clearly … established law.

    Cited 163 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.