Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1951

10,000+ results

4.29s

  • Isaiah Taylor v. Justin Schwarzhuber

    Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 19, 2025

    Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from monetary liability unless the law they ostensibly violated was clearly established at the time of the alleged offense. … The court awarded qualified immunity to Schwarzhuber and Rydzewski on Taylor’s initial stop and frisk claims be- cause Taylor did not provide cases showing the officers’ ac- tions violated clearly established law.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Fuhr v. City of Seattle

    Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 7, 2026

    CITY OF SEATTLE 3 established law that sets out a constitutional violation. Because no case clearly established a Fourth Amendment right violated by Zech, he was entitled to qualified immunity. … Because no case clearly established a Fourth Amendment right violated by Zech, he is entitled to qualified immunity. II. Other Claims Fuhr’s other claims also fail.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • KEMP EX REL. WRIGHT v. State, County of Burlington

    147 N.J. 294 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 14, 1997

    N.J.S.A. 26:11-12, however, establishes a generalized grant of qualified immunity to county boards and their agents “for any act ” performed “in good faith and with ordinary discretion.” … We conclude that N.J.S.A. 26:ll-12’s grant of only qualified immunity for discretionary acts is clearly inconsistent with the TCA’s general discretionary immunity provisions which provide for absolute immunity in that context

    Cited 36 timesPublished
  • Lisa Price v. Montgomery County

    72 F.4th 711 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 5, 2023

    To overcome a defendant’s qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must plausibly allege that (1) the official violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the right was “clearly established” at the time of … Miller has neither proven that violating a court order constitutes a constitutional violation, nor that such a violation is clearly established. As a result, Craycraft is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 44 timesPublished
  • David C. Warth v. Thomas Williamson

    Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 2, 2026

    immunity, Warth needed to establish that (1) Williamson violated a constitutional right, and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … Casey, 75 F.4th 1176, 1186 (11th Cir. 2023) (“[T]o establish the defense of qualified immunity for a false arrest claim, we have held that an officer need not have actual probable cause, but only arguable

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Gyadu v. Frankl

    62 F. Supp. 2d 590 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Jul 23, 1999

    Individuals are qualifiedly immune insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. Id. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 . … Thus, as to those remedies, the defendants enjoy qualified immunity. The motions to dismiss will be granted, on grounds of qualified immunity, as to the allegations of violations of 42 U.S.C.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Don A. Brawner v. City of Richardson, Texas, L.F. Eudy, Richardson Police Department Director, and Kenneth Yarbrough, Chief of Police

    855 F.2d 187 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 18, 1988

    established at the time he was fired so as to preclude their asserting a claim of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity is a defense for public officials if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” 19 “Clearly established” means

    Cited 139 timesPublished
  • Daniel Tanner v. Anita Phillips

    669 F. App'x 444 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 4, 2016

    established right. 2 14-35983 See Pearson v. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009) (defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless the conduct at issue violated a clearly established constitutional right).

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Allen v. Higgins

    902 F.2d 682 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 4, 1990

    Based on the trial court’s finding that the catalog ordered by Allen, “clearly posed no threat to the security of the institution,” the trial court concluded that Groose was not entitled to qualified immunity. We agree. … A government official performing discretionary functions is generally entitled to qualified immunity when his conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Lilly v. Lewiston-Porter Central School District

    853 F. Supp. 2d 346 · District Court, W.D. New York · Dec 20, 2011

    qualified immunity did not apply. … Then we consider if the violated right was clearly established at the time of the conduct....

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Rodriguez-Cortes v. Superintendencia del Capitolio

    236 F. Supp. 3d 498 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Feb 17, 2017

    (2), if so, whether that right was clearly established at the time of defendant’s violation.” … Defendants fail to satisfy either part of the qualified immunity test. Accordingly, the Court finds that the defense of qualified immunity does not apply to defendant Vazquez.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Bah v. City of N.Y.

    319 F. Supp. 3d 698 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 21, 2018

    Nevertheless, he is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct did not violate clearly established law. … On qualified immunity, the officer's actions are assessed in view of the clearly established law at the time the officer acted. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 , 244, 129 S.Ct. 808 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009).

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Larry Hope v. Mark Pelzer, Gene McClaran

    240 F.3d 975 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 14, 2001

    ’s qualified immunity analysis. … Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity from monetary damages if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

    Reversed on other grounds by Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730 (2002)Cited 30 timesPublished
  • Eidson v. Owens

    515 F.3d 1139 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 13, 2008

    Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … But if a violation can be shown, we must then consider whether the right was clearly established. Id. A.

    Cited 37 timesPublished
  • Sadallah v. City Of Utica

    383 F.3d 34 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 3, 2004

    defendant's action was objective[ly] legal [ly] reasonable[ ] ... in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken. 10 X-Men Sec., Inc. v. … Accordingly, Hanna is entitled to qualified immunity. C.

    Cited 106 timesPublished
  • Dunklin v. Lowndes County

    894 F. Supp. 1527 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Jun 30, 1995

    “clearly established”). … In plain terms, Hulett is entitled to qualified immunity if the Plaintiffs fail to produce sufficient evidence that, when viewed in the light most favorable to them, Hulett violated their clearly established Fourteenth Amendment

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Tanner v. San Juan County Sheriff's Office

    864 F. Supp. 2d 1090 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Mar 21, 2012

    Clearly Established Rights in the Qualified Immunity Analysis. … Qualified immunity shifts the burden to the plaintiff to establish that the officer violated clearly established law.

    Cited 37 timesPublished
  • Munger v. City of Glasgow Police Department

    227 F.3d 1082 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 6, 2000

    Qualified immunity “ ‘shield[s] [government agents] from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which 'a reasonable person would have … To evaluate a qualified immunity claim, we first ask whether the law governing the official’s conduct was clearly established; if so, we ask whether under that law, and under the circumstances at issue, a reasonable officer

    Cited 127 timesPublished
  • Holloway v. Lamar County

    180 F. Supp. 3d 467 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Apr 8, 2016

    “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 person … Therefore, because a reasonable officer would have known that tasing Plaintiff was objectively unreasonable under clearly established law, the Court does not find that Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity and will

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • CLIFT BY CLIFT v. Fincannon

    657 F. Supp. 1535 · District Court, E.D. Texas · Apr 13, 1987

    The resolution, then, of the qualified immunity defenses raised by these individually named Defendants turns initially on whether the law was clearly established at the time the action in question occurred. 13 *1545 Thus, … There being no clearly established federal right to habilitation in the least restrictive alternative setting, the individual Defendants’ claims of qualified immunity must prevail in that regard.

    Cited 7 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.