Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2012

10,000+ results

2.78s

  • Arzabala v. Weems

    District Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 31, 2023

    When a defendant has asserted a qualified-immunity defense, the Court may, under certain circumstances, permit limited discovery that is narrowly tailored to uncover facts that the Court needs to rule on the qualified-immunity … .”); see also Backe, 691 F.3d at 648 (explaining that “this court has established a careful procedure under which a district court may defer its qualified immunity ruling if further factual development is necessary to

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Jackson v. Johnson

    797 F. Supp. 2d 1057 · District Court, D. Montana · Jul 18, 2011

    Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields a government actor from a suit for damages if the actor could have reasonably believed his conduct was lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information possessed … With that determination it is necessary to turn to the second step in the qualified immunity analysis, i.e., whether the right violated by Deputy Johnson was clearly established in the law as of June 10, 2009. b.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Fogle

    867 F. Supp. 2d 61 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 17, 2012

    Qualified immunity is “a defense that shields officials from suit if their conduct ‘d[id] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Bame v. … "If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity." Id.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Curtis Morton v. City of Little Rock Phillip Wilson, and Ronnie Gatewood, Individually and in Their Official Capacities

    934 F.2d 180 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 30, 1991

    , (3) Wilson’s misconduct was negligent rather than intentional, and (4) plaintiff’s claims against Gatewood in his individual capacity were barred by qualified immunity and quasi-judicial immunity. … To avoid summary judgment based on qualified immunity, plaintiff must show that at the time of Gatewood's action or inaction, the specific right at issue was so clearly established that any reasonable law enforcement officer

    Cited 35 timesPublished
  • Escalera-Saldado v. United States

    261 F. Supp. 3d 163 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Sep 26, 2016

    The qualified immunity doctrine “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 person … To do so, the plaintiff must show that (1) “defendants violated a statutory or constitutional right,” and that (2) “the right was clearly established at the time.” Morales, 794 F.3d at 214 .

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Richardson v. U.S. Department of Interior

    740 F. Supp. 15 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 12, 1990

    Qualified immunity insulates officials from personal liability when their alleged tortious conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have been aware … Violations of “Clearly Established” Right In Harlow , the Supreme Court held that to overcome an assertion of qualified immunity the constitutional rights alleged by plaintiff to have been violated must have been “clearly

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Dominguez v. Figueroa Sancha

    373 F. Supp. 3d 333 · United States District Court · Feb 7, 2019

    Qualified Immunity [A] public actor's liability under [ § ] 1983 is not absolute: the doctrine of qualified immunity provides a safe harbor for a wide range of mistaken judgments. *348 Cox v. … Predictably, they now move for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, so the court will give it a second go. The qualified immunity inquiry "entails a two-step pavane." Alfano v.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Trugreen Landcare, L.L.C. v. Scott

    512 F. Supp. 2d 613 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 16, 2007

    Nationsbank Corp., 188 F.3d 579, 588 (5th Cir.1999) (holding that individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity from suit alleging RICO claim because rights that served as basis of claim were not clearly established … Although it is well settled that qualified immunity is not analyzed in identical terms as are the merits of Scott’s RICO claim, in these circumstances' — where Duebner is clearly entitled to summary judgment and has already

    Cited 108 timesPublished
  • Mark v. Shoen Edward J. Shoen v. Leonard Samuel Shoen Christina G. Shoen, Ronald J. Watkins, Witness-Appellant

    48 F.3d 412 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 15, 1995

    Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 , 92 S.Ct. 2646 , 33 L.Ed.2d 626 (1972), as establishing a qualified privilege for journalists against compelled disclosure of information gathered in the course of their work. … As a result, Leonard Shoen’s September 1991 statements, if any, regarding his attitude toward plaintiffs are not clearly relevant to an important issue in this litigation. 1 Although plaintiffs’ failure to establish clear

    Cited 47 timesPublished
  • Cunningham v. Snyder

    472 F. Supp. 2d 1023 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 19, 2006

    To defeat a qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that “the legal norms allegedly violated by the defendant were clearly established at the time of the challenged actions or, ... the law … See Greenberg, 840 F.2d at 472 (quoting Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 ) (observing that the principle underlying the doctrine of qualified immunity is that “[i]f the law at the time was not clearly established,

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • State Ex Rel. Jacobs v. Sherard

    36 N.C. App. 60 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 18, 1978

    Contending that prosecutorial immunity may be only “qualified,” or malice-destroyed, defendant relies on the following language in State v. … Swanson’s grant of only qualified immunity to public officers does not affect the general grant of absolute immunity to district attorneys.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • McCall Ex Rel. Odom v. Department of Human Resources

    176 F. Supp. 2d 1355 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Nov 29, 2001

    their conduct violates no ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Lassiter v. … “For the law to be clearly established to the point that qualified immunity does not apply, the law must have earlier been developed in such a concrete and factually defined context to make it obvious to all reasonable government

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Ricardo Salazar-Limon v. City of Houston

    826 F.3d 272 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 16, 2016

    “In order to overcome a qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must allege a violation of a constitutional right, and then must show that ‘the right was clearly established . . . in light of the specific context of the case … of which was clearly unreasonable.”

    Cited 73 timesPublished
  • Olson v. Johnson

    961 So. 2d 356 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 29, 2007

    Alternatively, Johnson asserts that a qualified privilege is applicable and is sufficient to defeat Olson's claim. We conclude that neither an absolute nor a qualified privilege applies here. … Sovereign Immunity Does Not Apply Finally, Johnson has failed to explain how her actions in filing the police affidavit could possibly be protected by sovereign immunity.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Kelly v. District of Columbia

    District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 15, 2021

    Even if the Court concluded that Officer Gaton’s use of force was not objectively reasonable, he is entitled to qualified immunity so long as the use force did not violate “clearly established” law. … a “clearly established” right.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Mason v. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection

    774 F. Supp. 2d 349 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 29, 2011

    entitled to qualified immunity because their liability had not been “clearly established.” 160 The Individual Defendants provide no First Circuit case law to support the application of qualified immunity here. 161 The Individual … See, e.g., Darby, 287 F.3d at 681 (explaining that the qualified immunity defense does not apply because the FMLA creates "clearly established statutory rights”).

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Mocek v. City of Albuquerque

    813 F.3d 912 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 22, 2015

    A circuit split will not satisfy the clearly established prong of qualified immunity. But even if we were persuaded by Tobey, Mocek has made no compelling argument as to why its logic should apply here. … Jurisdiction 10 Although qualified immunity shields municipal employees where the law is not clearly established, this defense does not apply to municipalities themselves. Cordova v.

    Cited 179 timesPublished
  • Keefer v. Durkos

    371 F. Supp. 2d 686 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 2005

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity for all of the allegations of the Complaint. Defendants’ Brief, p. 19. … Therefore, the Plaintiff possessed a clearly established right to procedural due process in her termination by virtue of the Pennsylvania Whistleblower Law. Qualified immunity is denied as to Count II. .

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Fuller v. Truncale

    50 So. 3d 25 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 2, 2010

    In the motion to dismiss, Fuller claimed judicial immunity against the class action, arguing he was simply following protocol established in several administrative orders. … Exposito, 824 So.2d 954, 955 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (stating ”[b]ecause qualified immunity protects an individual from having to defend a suit, O'Brien will effectively lose his entitlement to qualified immunity if the case proceeds

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Murphy v. Carroll

    202 F. Supp. 2d 421 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 10, 2002

    To determine the applicability of qualified immunity, this court follows a two-step analysis. … “Clearly established,” for pin-poses of qualified immunity analysis, means that the “contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.”

    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.