Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
5.60s
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 timesPublishedAdam 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 timesPublished141 F.3d 824 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 2, 1998
Therefore, we hold that the contours of the state-created danger theory, as applied to the unique facts of this case, were not defined clearly enough in 1991 to remove the defendants’ qualified immunity protection. 3 Greer … According to Greer, because the defendants would be indemnified, there is no reason to provide them with qualified immunity.
Cited 42 timesPublished764 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 timesPublished771 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 timesPublished235 F. Supp. 2d 1291 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 13, 2002
The defense of qualified immunity shields a government official from § 1983 liability for harms arising from the offi- *1296 dal’s discretionary acts, so long as the discretionary acts do not violate clearly established federal … Once the defendant establishes that he was acting within his discretion, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show, that qualified immunity should not be applied. Id.
Cited 1 timesPublishedWinig, J., Aplt. v. Office of DA of Phila.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 19, 2025
under the common law” and “held that immunity was not absolute but qualified and its availability depended on the circumstances of each case.” … To 5 No one disputes that Section 5725(b) clearly and unambiguously waives sovereign immunity.
Cited 0 timesPublished275 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 timesPublished405 F. Supp. 2d 170 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Aug 17, 2005
Saucier outlines the two steps of the qualified immunity analysis: (1) if a constitutional right was violated and (2) whether the right was clearly established. … In short, to set aside the buckler of qualified immunity ‘the right the official is alleged to have violated must have been ‘clearly established’ in a more particularized, and hence more relevant, sense.’
Cited 0 timesPublished442 F. Supp. 2d 1131 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jul 24, 2006
A public official performing a discretionary function enjoys qualified immunity in a civil action for damages, provided his or her conduct does not violate clearly established federal statutory or constitutional rights of … On the other hand, if a violation has been shown, the next step in the qualified immunity sequence is to ask whether the constitutional right was clearly established. Id.
Cited 2 timesPublished638 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 timesPublished29 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 timesPublished933 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 timesPublished925 F. Supp. 478 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Apr 23, 1996
Qualified Immunity Once a prima facie case under Section 1983 is established, the question becomes whether a defendant is entitled to some kind of defense against or immunity from damages liability. … a qualified immunity defense to police officers.
Cited 1 timesPublished2023 IL App (1st) 211353 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 10, 2023
In such situations, the only relevant immunity provision is section 2-202 of the Act, which provides qualified immunity to public employees for acts or omissions “in the execution or enforcement of any law unless such … Additionally, unlike section 4-102, the immunity afforded under section 2-202 is qualified rather than absolute; a police officer is entitled to immunity under the provision unless the officer’s conduct was “willful and
Cited 4 timesPublished146 F.3d 1227 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 24, 1998
Qualified immunity protects government officials from individual liability in a section 1983 action unless the officials violated clearly established constitutional rights. See Harlow v. … City and County of Denver, 960 F.2d 1493 (10th Cir. 1992), clearly established that Deputy Barela’s conduct was unconstitutional. Thus, the district court again denied qualified immunity to Deputy Barela.
Cited 72 timesPublished214 F. Supp. 3d 552 · District Court, E.D. Texas · Oct 4, 2016
“A plaintiff seeking to defeat qualified immunity must show that (1) the official violated a statutory or constitutional right and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … “The law is clearly established that a public employee may be neither discharged nor demoted in retaliation for exercising his First Amendment Rights.” Cox, 577 Fed.Appx. at 313 .
Cited 3 timesPublished787 So. 2d 177 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 11, 2001
Clearly, your actions are criminal regardless of whether or not your accusations are untrue.... . . . . … Therefore, the appellees did not establish that they were entitled to a summary judgment based on an undisputed fact of nonpublication.
Cited 9 timesPublished2026 Ohio 734 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 5, 2026
“The doctrine of qualified immunity generally shields public officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages to the extent that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … to qualified immunity.
Cited 4 timesPublishedJohn K. Maciver Institute for Public Policy, Inc. v. Schmitz
243 F. Supp. 3d 1028 · District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Mar 16, 2017
Immunity Assuming plaintiffs could prove that defendants violated the SCA and lacked good faith in doing so, there is still the question of their right to absolute or qualified immunity. … Zirkelbach, 149 F.3d 614, 618 (7th Cir. 1998) (framing qualified immunity issue regarding a claim for a violation of the Federal Wiretap Act as “whether [defendant’s] actions violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional
Cited 2 timesPublished
Ask Donna