Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.87s
Caceres v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey
646 F. Supp. 2d 412 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 19, 2009
Notwithstanding the violation of a clearly established constitutional or statutory right, in the case of an arrest an officer may still establish qualified immunity under federal law by showing either that “it was objectively … Therefore, the only issue is whether Lieutenant Sangiorgi is entitled to qualified immunity notwithstanding his violation of the plaintiffs clearly established constitutional right — that is, whether Lieutenant Sangiorgi’
Cited 2 timesPublishedRyan v. Mesa Unified School District
64 F. Supp. 3d 1356 · District Court, D. Arizona · Dec 5, 2014
Count I Goodman argues that Count I fails both prongs of the qualified immunity test. … prayer before softball games” is unconstitutional. 52 In sum, Goodman argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because the law regarding “the intersection of public schools and religion is far from clearly established
Cited 2 timesPublished27 F.3d 1346 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 5, 1994
The district court held the federal claims were barred by qualified immunity and the state claims by official immunity. … An official loses immunity if, first, the law he violated was clearly established at the time of the violation, and second, the applicability of the law to his particular action was evident. Id.
Cited 138 timesPublishedTimmons v. New York State Department of Correctional Services
887 F. Supp. 576 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 25, 1995
He argues, however, that he is entitled to qualified immunity on this portion of plaintiffs Eighth Amendment claim. Good faith or qualified immunity is an affirmative defense in actions under § 1983. Harlow v. … Even where a right has been clearly established, a defendant is immune from liability if it was objectively reasonable for him to believe that his acts did not violate *581 that right. Anderson v.
Cited 3 timesPublishedZackary Stewart v. Karl Wagner
836 F.3d 978 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 12, 2016
On this record, we conclude it was error to deny Prosecutor Selby qualified immunity on this claim because Stewart failed to present sufficient evidence that Wagner and Selby violated “clearly established [Fourth Amendment … If the motion was made and denied, that would at least establish there was no clearly established violation of the Sixth Amendment.
Cited 28 timesPublished281 F. Supp. 2d 390 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Aug 26, 2003
The defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. The Court will address each of these arguments below after a general discussion of qualified immunity. … If the law was clearly established that the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right, qualified immunity is inappropriate.
Cited 2 timesPublishedBuckley v. BARBOUR COUNTY, ALA.
624 F. Supp. 2d 1335 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Dec 15, 2008
An official is not entitled to qualified immunity if (1) the official’s conduct violated a constitutional or statutory right; and (2) the violation was “ ‘clearly established.’ ” Id. (quoting Saucier v. … Gamble thus fails the first prong of the qualified immunity test. The violation was also “clearly established,” placing Gamble on fair notice of an unconstitutional violation.
Cited 3 timesPublished864 F. Supp. 360 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 6, 1994
DISCUSSION Qualified immunity has long shielded government officials performing discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Thus, Martinez is only entitled to qualified immunity if, assuming the facts as set forth by the plaintiff, it was objectively reasonable for Martinez to believe, in light of clearly established law and the information he
Cited 1 timesPublishedNicholas Bolton v. Sheriff of Coweta County, GA
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 21, 2026
that “was clearly established.” … Bolton fails to explain how any violation of his rights was clearly established.
Cited 0 timesPublished203 So. 3d 126 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · Dec 18, 2015
Absent a clearly expressed legislative intent to the contrary, the language of the statute is conclusive. … We first note that Harrison is not entitled to any relief on his claim that he presented sufficient evidence during trial and after trial to establish that he was immune from prosecution.
Cited 7 timesPublished128 F.4th 727 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 13, 2025
“Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established [statutory or] constitutional right.” Converse v. City of Kemah, 961 F.3d 771, 774 (5th Cir. 2020) (quoting Mace v. … If defendant asserts a qualified-immunity defense, “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 established
Cited 10 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 timesPublished170 Ariz. 20 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Nov 21, 1991
and (2) qualified immunity, which is available for nondiscretionary acts. … The licensing and regulation of any profession or occupation falls within the grant of absolute immunity, not qualified immunity.
Cited 19 timesPublished661 F.3d 981 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 21, 2011
Qualified immunity shields public officials from civil lawsuits when their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … To determine whether the agents are entitled to qualified immunity, we consider (1) whether the facts alleged, construed in the light most favorable to Keil, establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and
Cited 22 timesPublished154 F. Supp. 2d 1085 · District Court, W.D. Michigan · May 2, 2001
The only issue for this Court is whether Fromson violated clearly established federal rights guaranteed by the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. 1. … Even if this Court were to find some arguable equal protection or due process violation, Fromson would nevertheless be entitled to qualified immunity unless Plaintiff could show that his rights were “clearly established”
Overruled on other grounds by Lapides v. Board of Regents of Univ. System of Ga., 535 U.S. 613 (2002)Cited 15 timesPublished61 F. Supp. 3d 960 · District Court, E.D. California · Nov 21, 2014
Qualified immunity shields 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 have known … . *971 The qualified immunity inquiry has two prongs: (1) “whether the facts that a plaintiff has ... shown ... make out a violation of a constitutional right,” and (2) “whether the right at issue was ‘clearly established
Cited 20 timesPublishedRicky Brogsdale v. Marion S. Barry, Jr., Donyell A. Marsh v. Marion S. Barry, Jr.
926 F.2d 1184 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 12, 1991
legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.” … Hollowell, 714 F.2d 1372, 1376 (5th Cir.1983) (inmates’ rights were “clearly established” by earlier court order, such that breach of that order could not be within officials’ qualified immunity).
Cited 42 timesPublished677 F.3d 361 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 3, 2012
Qualified immunity protects officers from liability in a section 1983 case “unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known.” … clearly established constitutional violation.
Cited 57 timesPublishedArkansas Attorney General Reports · Jan 17, 2001
The test for the applicability of qualified immunity turns upon the "objective legal reasonableness of the action," assessed in light of legal rules that were "clearly established" at the time the action was taken. … The immunity is "qualified" because it does not obtain where the activity is in violation of clearly established law that a reasonable person would have known. Robinson v.
Cited 0 timesPublished364 F. Supp. 3d 709 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Mar 8, 2019
Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields public officials "from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … The qualified immunity inquiry is twofold, requiring assessment of "(1) whether the facts alleged by the plaintiff make out the violation of a constitutional right and (2) whether the right at issue was 'clearly established
Cited 9 timesPublished
Ask Donna