Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

10,000+ results

1.43s

  • Sandra Outler v. Kelly Cooper

    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 timesPublished
  • Wilson v. Blankenship

    163 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 timesPublished
  • Eberhardinger v. City of York

    341 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 timesPublished
  • Van Dyke v. Washington

    896 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 timesPublished
  • Salinas 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 timesPublished
  • George v. Beaver County

    32 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 timesPublished
  • Miley v. Housing Authority

    926 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 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Ridgway

    845 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 timesPublished
  • Hill v. Florio

    District 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 timesUnknown
  • Blissett v. Coughlin

    66 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 timesPublished
  • Darryl Leon Rouse v. William Plantier, Acting Superintendent of A.D.T.C. Sally S. Scheidemantel, Resigning Superintendent of A.D.T.C. William H. Fauver, Commissioner of N.J. Department of Corrections Governor Jim Florio, State of New Jersey Dr. Robert Cardinale, Medical Director of A.D.T.C. Dr. Narshima Reddy, Attending Physician of A.D.T.C. Ms. Elaine Martin, Chief Nurse of A.D.T.C. Captain Helmkin, Housing Mike Zell, Director of Social Services Dr. Sandoval, Attending Psychologist of A.D.T.C. Dr. Cattone, M.D., St. Francis Hospital Scott Faunce Dr. Tarlian, M.D. Dr. O'bryne, M.D. Dr. Todd, M.D., St. Francis Hospital Charles Brooks, on Behalf of a Class of Themselves and Others Similarly Situated Stephen Jankowski, on Behalf of a Class of Themselves and Others Similarly Situated Julio Baez, on Behalf of a Class of Themselves and Others Similarly Situated Robert Kammerer, on Behalf of a Class of Themselves and Others Similarly Situated v. Elaine Allen John Doe Jane Roe William Plantier Robert Cardinale Narshima Reddy Elaine Allen

    182 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 timesPublished
  • Charter 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 timesPublished
  • State v. Jett

    316 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 timesPublished
  • Harvey 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 timesPublished
  • Morris 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 timesPublished
  • Wesley 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 timesUnpublished
  • Doe v. Terry

    District 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 timesUnknown
  • Brenda 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 timesPublished
  • Landers v. Adelstein

    Court 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 timesUnpublished
  • Medeiros 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

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.