Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1862

10,000+ results

1.37s

  • 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
  • Jones v. Yanta

    610 F. Supp. 2d 34 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2009

    Qualified Immunity “[Government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not vio *43 late clearly established statutory or constitutional … However, “[a] plaintiff who seeks damages for violation of constitutional or statutory rights may overcome the defendant official’s qualified immunity only by showing that those rights were clearly established at the time

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Does v. Covington County School Board of Education

    930 F. Supp. 554 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Jan 2, 2003

    However, the court then held that because this duty was not clearly established at that time, the school officials were entitled to qualified immunity. Id. … The law, however, cannot be established by dicta. As stated by the Eleventh Circuit, [d]ieta is particularly -unhelpful in qualified immunity cases where we seek to identify clearly established law. See, e.g., Jones v.

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Schrob v. Catterson

    948 F.2d 1402 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 15, 1991

    any clearly established constitutional rights. … Absolute immunity defeats a suit at the outset, while an official with qualified immunity must establish that "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

    Cited 359 timesPublished
  • State of Arizona v. Justin James Chase

    232 Ariz. 265 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · May 17, 2013

    “If the existence of immunity turns on disputed factual issues, the jury determines the facts and the court then determines whether those facts are sufficient to establish immunity.” Chamberlain v. … Should the defendant fail to establish immunity, the state, of course, still must prove all elements of the charged offenses beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Peete v. Metropolitan Government Of Nashville And Davidson County

    486 F.3d 217 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 22, 2007

    clearly established." … The Court held that Champion's arrest and restraint by police constituted a clearly established unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment and denied the police officers' argument that they were entitled to qualified

    Cited 48 timesPublished
  • Cruz v. Mississippi Department of Human Services

    9 F. Supp. 3d 668 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Mar 10, 2014

    Qualified Immunity To defeat a claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show that (1) the plaintiff has alleged that the defendant has violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right, and (2) a reasonable … person would have known of that clearly established right.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • 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
  • Schroeder v. County of Nassau

    158 F. Supp. 3d 123 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 28, 2016

    violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” … “Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that the defendants have the burden of raising in their answer and establishing at trial or on a motion for summary judgment.”

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Campbell v. District of Columbia

    245 F. Supp. 3d 78 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 29, 2017

    “Qualified immunity prevents officials who violate the law from having to defend against lawsuits for money damages unless the legal rules that were clearly established at the time the action was taken gave those officials … Accordingly, under clearly established precedent, Defendants are not entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity because, on the undisputed facts, the officers would have had “fair warning” that they

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Dontray Chaney v. City of Orlando, FL

    291 F. App'x 238 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 26, 2008

    Qualified immunity shields officers from civil liability if, considering the facts in the light most favorable to the party asserting the injury, the officers’ conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional … to establish that qualified immunity does not apply.”

    Cited 4 timesUnpublished
  • Adam Cmty. Ctr. v. City of Troy

    381 F. Supp. 3d 887 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Apr 3, 2019

    In contrast, legislative officials performing traditionally executive or administrative discretionary functions are entitled to only qualified immunity if they can establish that their actions were within the scope of their … Qualified immunity for Individual Defendants Defendants argue that the zoning board members are entitled to qualified immunity in connection with Plaintiff's claims.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Doug Morgan v. Plano Independent School District

    610 F.3d 877 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 30, 2010

    Qualified immunity thus shields government officials performing discretionary functions from individual liability for civil damages but only “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established rights of which a … Appellees’ have alleged a violation of clearly established law; therefore, Appellants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Lebron v. Rumsfeld

    764 F. Supp. 2d 787 · District Court, D. South Carolina · Feb 17, 2011

    Qualified Immunity Defendants further argue that even if Padilla could assert a viable cause of action, they would still be protected from liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity. … are entitled to qualified immunity on all of Plaintiffs’ claims.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Manzer v. TOWN OF ANSON

    771 F. Supp. 2d 121 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 23, 2011

    The Plaintiffs then argue that the second element of the qualified immunity test — whether their rights were clearly established — is met. Id. at 12-13. … The Barton Court, in its own qualified immunity analysis, held that in 2006 and 2007, it was clearly established that a campaign of harassment could support a First Amendment retaliation claim if the harassment would deter

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Hall v. Ryan

    957 F.2d 402 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 28, 1992

    Judge Baker noted that qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability if their actions do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 , 97 S.Ct. 285 , 50 L.Ed.2d 251 , the standard of conduct imposed on defendants with respect to the care of people in custody was clearly established, so that the police officers' qualified immunity defense

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • Saldana v. DiMedio

    275 N.J. Super. 488 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 18, 1994

    Id. at 414, 608 A. 2d 263 ; see also N.J.S.A. 59:3-2(d) (providing qualified immunity for discretionary decision-making). … If, however, the qualified immunity for discretionary decision making does not apply, plaintiffs only need satisfy the standards of ordinary negligence.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Scarpa v. Ponte

    638 F. Supp. 1019 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 2, 1986

    Third, Scarpa claims that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity because his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments were clearly established at the time he was wrongly punished. 2 A. … In King, the First Circuit Court of Appeals took into account the defendant’s violation of clearly established prison regulations in denying his qualified immunity defense.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Kesler v. King

    29 F. Supp. 2d 356 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Dec 7, 1998

    With respect to Defendant Wagner’s claim of qualified immunity, the Court has already concluded that Plaintiffs have alleged violations of two clearly established constitutional rights. See Siegert v. … to show that qualified immunity does not bar recovery.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Dean v. Thomas

    933 F. Supp. 600 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Jul 1, 1996

    However, this “qualified immunity” is defeated if the defendant official took the complained-of action “with the malicious intention to cause a deprivation of rights,” or the official violated clearly established statutory … Officials are not ordinarily entitled to the protection of qualified immunity if clearly established constitutional rights have been violated.

    Cited 3 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.