Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1815

10,000+ results

2.21s

  • Zarnow v. City of Wichita Falls, Texas

    500 F.3d 401 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 13, 2007

    Smith, 117 F.3d 866, 871-72 (5th Cir. 1997) (“We do not require that an official demonstrate that he did not violate clearly established federal rights; our precedent places that burden upon plaintiffs.”). … To prevail, Zarnow must show that the search was unreasonable under clearly-established law at the time of the search. See Sorenson v. Ferrie, 134 F.3d 325, 328 (5th Cir. 1998).

    Cited 53 timesPublished
  • Peter Antonellis v. Department of Elder Affairs and Ann Hartsein, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Secretary of Elder Affairs

    Massachusetts Superior Court · Jan 15, 2019

    Even if Plaintiff establishes these three elements, a Defendant escapes liability if he or she shows an entitlement to qualified immunity, an affirmative defense. DiMarco C Zappa v. … clearly established rights."

    Cited 0 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
  • United States v. Holcomb

    132 F.4th 1118 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 27, 2025

    As our qualified immunity cases make clear, an officer is immune from civil suit where the plaintiff’s rights were not “clearly established” at the time of his alleged misconduct. Ballentine v. … HOLCOMB circuit[,] . . . there still might not be clearly established case law in our circuit to withstand qualified immunity.” Id.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • McRae v. Tena

    914 F. Supp. 363 · District Court, D. Arizona · Jan 25, 1996

    Qualified Immunity The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has repeatedly held that the defense of qualified immunity is available to police officers in excessive force cases. See, e.g., Scott v. … The Supreme Court eschewed generalizing of the “clearly established right” factor.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Moreta-Ramirez v. Lemert

    156 F. Supp. 2d 138 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jul 18, 2001

    Qualified Immunity Defendants invoke the doctrine of qualified immunity in support of their motion to dismiss. The defense of qualified immunity is available to federal officials acting in the scope of their employment. … Interpreting Harlow , the First Circuit has established a three-part inquiry to determine whether or not the doctrine of qualified immunity applies in a given situation.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Maritza Amador v. Bexar County

    952 F.3d 624 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 11, 2020

    Flores’s Fourth Amendment Right Was Clearly Established The second question in the qualified immunity analysis is whether clearly established law prohibited the officers from shooting Flores in these circumstances … We cannot “‘define clearly established law at a high level of generality,’” id.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Connecticut Criminal Defense Lawyers Ass'n v. Forst

    88 F.3d 111 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 3, 1996

    On appeal, defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity principally because at the pertinent times it was not clearly established that tape-recording telephone calls, without ever listening to them, violated … Summary judgment dismissing a claim on the basis of the defendants’ qualified-immunity defense may thus be granted if the court finds that the asserted rights were not clearly established, or if the evidence is such that,

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Helms v. Gamet

    828 F. Supp. 819 · District Court, D. Colorado · Aug 6, 1993

    Qualified Immunity Defendants claim that Officer Garnet is entitled to qualified immunity from suit because a reasonable officer in his position could have believed his actions were lawful. … legal rules that were clearly established at the time the action was taken.

    Cited 2 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
  • Crandel v. Hastings

    75 F.4th 537 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 1, 2023

    “Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established [statutory or] constitutional right.” Converse v. … Again, when defendants assert qualified immunity, “a plaintiff seeking to overcome qualified immunity must show: (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Kerns v. Board of Com'rs of Bernalillo County

    707 F. Supp. 2d 1190 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Apr 12, 2010

    They argued that, even if the right to exclude is clearly established, they were still entitled to qualified immunity because the right to be free from retaliation in the private property context is not clearly established … Wilkie that the plaintiff had a clearly established Fifth-Amendment right to exclude others from his property, so qualified immunity was inappropriate for retaliation for the exercise of that clearly established right.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Mattingly v. Mitchell

    425 S.W.3d 85 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Jun 21, 2013

    Although Prater involved a claim of absolute immunity, the rule is logically extended to a claim of qualified official immunity. … Our Supreme Court held teachers assigned to supervise a school-sponsored baseball practice were not entitled to qualified official immunity because the school had an established rule that children were required to wear batting

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Donahue v. Gavin

    280 F.3d 371 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 7, 2002

    B. 28 Government officials exercising discretionary functions have qualified immunity from suits seeking damages under § 1983 "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … violated some clearly established statutory or constitutional right.

    Cited 131 timesPublished
  • Gilbert v. Selsky

    867 F. Supp. 159 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 29, 1994

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are shielded from liability provided that their actions are discretionary in nature and do not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional … Sullivan, 720 F.Supp. 40, 43-44 (S.D.N.Y.1989) (right to independent assessment not clearly established in 1988).

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Stone-El v. Fairman

    785 F. Supp. 711 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 17, 1991

    We now turn to the issue of qualified immunity. B. … However, as the right in question was not clearly established in reference to the facts of this case, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. As such, we dismiss Stone-El’s amended complaint in its entirety.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Timmins v. Toto

    91 F. App'x 165 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Feb 5, 2004

    To establish qualified immunity in § 1983 claims, a defendant must show “either ‘(a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant to believe that his … Whatever rule Walsh established, that rule was not clearly established at the time of the chase. Toto is therefore entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. Abromaitis, 294 F.3d at 360 .

    Cited 12 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
  • Souza v. Pina

    53 F.3d 423 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Apr 28, 1995

    Otherwise, as the Supreme Court has observed, the generality at which courts identify the "clearly established" legal right threatens to "convert the rule of qualified immunity . . . … Because Souza has failed to establish that appellants' acts transgressed a clearly established right, we conclude that defendants may invoke the defense of qualified immunity.

    Cited 69 timesPublished
  • Broussard v. Lafayette City-Parish Consolidated Government

    45 F. Supp. 3d 553 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Sep 5, 2014

    The defendants’ motions for sanctions and the alternative motions for summary judgment on qualified immunity are DEFERRED. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION PATRICK J. HANNA, United States Magistrate Judge. … The Punitive Damages Claims It has been thirty-three years since the Supreme Court clearly stated: “we hold that a municipality is immune from punitive damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 .” City of Newport v.

    Cited 23 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.