Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.43s
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 10, 2025
Cooper argues that we have jurisdiction because this appeal presents issues of law re- lating to his qualified-immunity defense. … However, Cooper argues in his merits brief that, even if he violated the Eighth Amendment, that violation was not clearly established at the relevant time, USCA11 Case: 25-11522 Document: 29-2 Date
Cited 0 timesPublished163 F.3d 1284 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 31, 1998
General propositions and abstractions do not qualify for bright line, clearly established law. See Lassiter, 28 F.3d at 1150. … detainees housed there or specific square footage for inmates to exercise violates no clearly established law for qualified immunity purposes, as we clarify. 1.
Cited 117 timesPublished341 F. Supp. 3d 420 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 17, 2018
Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects a state actor who has committed a constitutional violation if the plaintiff's rights were not "clearly established" when the individual acted. See Pearson v. … The Supreme Court of the United States has repeatedly admonished that, when analyzing qualified immunity, courts should not "define clearly established law at a high level of generality."
Cited 8 timesPublished896 F. Supp. 183 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Aug 3, 1995
However, "the defense of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions `from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … and (2) whether the constitutional standards implicated were clearly established at the time in question.
Cited 5 timesPublishedSalinas v. Texas Workforce Commission
573 F. App'x 370 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 19, 2014
To evaluate a qualified immunity defense the court must inquire: “(1) whether the defendant’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) whether the defendant’s conduct was objectively unreasonably in light of clearly … Salinas has not shown that any defendant violated his constitutional rights or clearly established law.
Cited 9 timesPublished32 F.4th 1246 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 3, 2022
In the qualified-immunity context, “[a] clearly established right is one that is sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right.” Cummings v. … Thus, Rose’s conduct did not violate clearly established law, and he is entitled to qualified immunity. The district court properly granted summary judgment to the County, Noel, and Rose.
Cited 56 timesPublished926 F. Supp. 2d 420 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Feb 25, 2013
Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability where the officials’ conduct was not in violation of a ‘clearly established’ constitutional right.” Sudler v. … by qualified immunity.”
Cited 14 timesPublished845 F. Supp. 2d 1273 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 29, 2012
“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. … See Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 (“Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability under federal law unless their conduct violates a clearly established
Cited 1 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. Georgia · Mar 31, 2025
“Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from suits in their individual capacities unless their conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional … “Thus, if a defendant asserts a qualified immunity defense in a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, the Court should grant qualified immunity if the plaintiff’s complaint fails to allege a violation of a clearly established
Cited 0 timesUnknown66 F.3d 531 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 25, 1995
In the context of the claims in this case, qualified immunity affords government officials a two-tier defense “from liability from civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Consistent with their pretrial posture, Appellants made no further effort to establish a qualified immunity defense following the colloquy.
Cited 163 timesPublished182 F.3d 192 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 29, 1999
Turning to defendants' qualified immunity defense, the District Court held that the right at issue was clearly established and that the defendants had failed to demonstrate the reasonableness of their actions. … immunity, it is necessary to determine whether a reasonable official in the position of that defendant would have known that his or her actions were unconstitutional in light of the clearly established law and the information
Cited 851 timesPublishedCharter Township of York v. Donald Miller
322 Mich. App. 648 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 18, 2018
The MMMA provides immunity from arrest, prosecution, and penalties in any manner, and prohibits the denial of any rights or privileges to qualifying medical marijuana patients and registered primary caregivers. … The MMMA also provides that other state law inconsistent with the MMMA may not interfere with the rights established under the MMMA.
Cited 7 timesPublished316 Md. 248 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 31, 1989
Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 , 105 S.Ct. 2806, 2815-17 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) (Attorney General qualified immunity); Nixon v. … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) (denial of a claim of qualified immunity, to the extent it turns on an issue of law); Nixon v.
Cited 19 timesPublishedHarvey Lucious Hall v. George Lombardi William Armontrout, Warden Donald Cline
996 F.2d 954 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 11, 1993
In determining whether the appellants are protected by qualified immunity, we must first decide “the essentially legal question whether the conduct of which [Hall] complains violated clearly established law,” and then we … The test “focuses on the objective legal reasonableness of an official’s acts,” and the qualified immunity defense fails if the official violates a clearly established right because “a reasonably competent public official
Cited 32 timesPublishedMorris v. Town of Lexington Alabama
748 F.3d 1316 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 21, 2014
“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 … rights were “clearly established” when the defendant committed the act complained of.
Cited 54 timesPublishedWesley Brayman v. Mark Shepherd
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 4, 1996
of clearly established law.'" … Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 231 (1991) (holding that the first inquiry in a proper qualified immunity analysis is whether the plaintiff alleged the violation of a clearly established constitutional right).
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · Nov 28, 2023
Qualified immunity is “an affirmative defense shielding governmental officials from liability so long as their conduct does ‘not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Additionally, because the law was clearly established at the time of Defendant’s actions, Defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknownBrenda Albert v. City of Wheeling
238 W. Va. 129 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 27, 2016
Therefore, unless there is a bona fide dispute as to the foundational or historical facts that underlie the immunity determination, the ultimate questions of statutory or qualified immunity are ripe for summary disposition … To decide otherwise would risk further erosion of “well-established common law and statutory immunities which are vital to the proper functioning] of government.”
Cited 17 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 8, 2021
“The grant of a motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity similarly is reviewed de novo.” Whitley v. Hanna, 726 F.3d 631, 637 (5th Cir. 2013). … His assertions that Adelstein was not entitled to qualified immunity fail as he cannot establish the denial of a constitutional right.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMedeiros v. Merced County Sheriff Deputy Clark
713 F. Supp. 2d 1043 · District Court, E.D. California · May 5, 2010
Qualified immunity serves to shield government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … Thus, Satterfield is not entitled to *1063 qualified immunity for these alleged acts, because they violated the plaintiffs’ clearly established constitutional rights. Id. at 1005-1007. See also Bretz v.
Cited 6 timesPublished
Ask Donna