Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.43s
676 F. Supp. 228 · District Court, D. Colorado · Dec 31, 1987
Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions ... are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … When the affirmative defense of qualified immunity is raised, the plaintiff has the burden of convincing the court that his federal constitutional or statutory rights were clearly established at the time of the questioned
Cited 6 timesPublished85 F.3d 1113 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 4, 1996
It is well established that government officials are protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity not only from damage liability but from suit, “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … to qualified immunity.
Cited 90 timesPublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 16, 2018
Immunity applies when snow or ice is the alleged cause of the accident. … Super. at 269 ("In the absence of a clearly established landlord-tenant relationship, our courts have previously rejected attempts by slip and fall plaintiffs to classify a particular public entity as akin to a commercial
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 16, 2025
To overcome qualified immunity, Ballentine must show (1) “that he adequately alleged that his rights were violated,” and (2) “that, at the time his rights were violated, legal precedent clearly established the officials’ … Again, however, the second step of qualified immunity—whether “legal precedent clearly established the officials’ actions as unlawful”—bars Ballentine from recovering damages.3 Stevenson, 113 F.4th at 501. ______
Cited 0 timesPublished256 F.3d 679 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 9, 2001
Having found that Delaney has alleged a constitutional violation, we consider whether the right he asserts was clearly established prior to the spring of 1996. “ ‘[C]learly established’ for purposes of qualified immunity … On this record, Judge Coar was right to deny the qualified immunity plea of all defendants.
Cited 188 timesPublished746 F.3d 1112 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 31, 2014
does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Id. at 440 (quoting Pearson v. … In determining whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, we consider (1) whether there has been a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the officer
Cited 110 timesPublished688 F. Supp. 353 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 19, 1988
Qualified Immunity Defendants’ final contention is that they are immune from suit because their conduct did not violate any “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806, 2815-16 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) makes clear, qualified immunity encompasses not only immunity from liability but immunity from suit.
Cited 3 timesPublished87 F. Supp. 2d 205 · District Court, W.D. New York · Mar 14, 2000
Qualified Immunity: The defense of qualified immunity “shields government officials from liability for damages on account of their performance of discretionary functions ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … This Court does not believe the law of qualified immunity requires the wearing of such blinders. Precise “definitional specificity” has never been the determinant for “clearly established” legal rules.
Cited 10 timesPublished902 F. Supp. 2d 178 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Oct 2, 2012
Carroll are not entitled to qualified immunity because the unconstitutionality of RSA 644:4, 1(f) was clearly established by the New Hampshire Supreme Court’s decision in Pierce . … Even so, the officers are entitled to qualified immunity because Farrelly’s right to send the e-mails in question was not clearly established at the time of his arrest.
Cited 2 timesPublished269 F. Supp. 3d 743 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Aug 28, 2017
A defendant who can validly raise a qualified immunity defense will enjoy its protection so long as the allegedly violated constitutional right was not clearly established at the time of the violation. See id. … This right is a clearly established right for the purposes of a qualified immunity analysis. See id.
Cited 5 timesPublished178 F. Supp. 3d 819 · District Court, D. Nebraska · Apr 12, 2016
Qualified immunity shields public officials performing discretionary functions from liability for conduct that does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … In determining whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, the Court asks (1) whether the facts alleged establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right and (2) whether that right *833 was clearly established
Cited 1 timesPublished400 F. Supp. 2d 922 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Apr 4, 2005
As noted above, plaintiffs have the burden to show that qualified immunity is unavailable here and to do so plaintiffs must show that the right which they allege defendant violated was clearly established in December 2001 … City of Corinth, 135 F.3d 320 , 325 (5th Cir.1998): In reviewing a claim of qualified immunity, this Court must determine: ‘(1) whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right;
Cited 0 timesPublished275 F.3d 391 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 28, 2001
The district court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss, holding that the Defendants, having violated no clearly established law, were entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”
Cited 721 timesPublished584 F.3d 888 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 19, 2009
entitled to qualified immunity.” … Clearly Established Law The next question is whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the alleged unlawful incident.
Cited 125 timesPublishedJohnnie Savory v. Allen Andrews
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 14, 2026
The officers in this case are entitled to qualified immunity only if their interrogation techniques did not violate Savory’s clearly established right to due process. Rivas-Villegas v. … Regardless, focusing on this difference is too myopic an approach given that Savory need only present similar—not identical—cases to satisfy qualified immunity’s “clearly established” requirement.
Cited 0 timesPublished842 F.3d 133 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 22, 2016
Qualified Immunity Framework Qualified immunity analysis, which forecloses Speaker Eves’s damages claims, encompasses two inquiries. … Oct. 24, 2016) (affording qualified immunity to elected official, for lack of clearly established law, in part because “it has never been established that a governmental official who does not himself retaliate but instead
Cited 13 timesPublished258 F. Supp. 3d 761 · District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Jul 11, 2017
right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”’” … immunity; the law was clearly established that “no reasonable officer could .have thought that this amount of force was legal under the circumstances,” even though there was no case directly on point.
Cited 0 timesPublishedHarris v. New York State Education Department
419 F. Supp. 2d 530 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 6, 2006
, as long as Congress’s intent to do so is expressed clearly and the state actually waives its immunity through an intentional relinquishment of a known right. … To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, Harris must show that (1) he has a disability for purposes of the Rehabilitation Act; (2) he is otherwise qualified for the benefit
Cited 10 timesPublished156 F. Supp. 2d 1369 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Jul 31, 2001
If there was no underlying constitutional violation, then Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, regardless of whether the law was clearly established. See Hartley v. … Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim because they were unaware that Carr had been shot and because Carr has not shown that their conduct violated clearly established law.
Cited 6 timesPublishedArnold v. South Carolina Department of Corrections
843 F. Supp. 110 · District Court, D. South Carolina · Feb 3, 1994
Certainly, its applicability is not “clearly established,” which calls into play the qualified immunity of Defendants. … “Government officials who are sued for damages under § 1983 for their performance of discretionary functions are entitled to a qualified immunity defense if they prove that their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established
Cited 14 timesPublished
Ask Donna