Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

10,000+ results

1.31s

  • Shafran v. Parrish

    787 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 timesPublished
  • Jacob v. Township of West Bloomfield

    531 F.3d 385 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 3, 2008

    This second prong of the qualified immunity test clearly weighs in Plaintiffs favor. … claim of qualified immunity.

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • Catrina Johnson v. City of Minneapolis

    901 F.3d 963 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 24, 2018

    We first turn to the question of qualified immunity. … -11- so the district court did not address the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity test.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Walton v. NM State Land Office

    821 F.3d 1204 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 19, 2016

    Powell submits that his actions weren’t clearly forbidden by existing law at the time he took them so he’s entitled to qualified immunity. … Powell rightly notes that, to avoid a qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must show not only that her federal constitutional or statutory rights were violated but also that they were so “clearly established” at the

    Cited 51 timesPublished
  • HASSUNEH v. City of Minneapolis

    560 F. Supp. 2d 764 · District Court, D. Minnesota · May 29, 2008

    Here, Defendants assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs’ § 1983 claims. Qualified immunity shields government officials as well as private individuals from civil liability under § 1983. … Second, the alleged right must be clearly established. Id.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • State v. McInnes

    2026 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 timesPublished
  • Robert Eugene Rogers v. Officer Kevin Powell Officer Jeffrey Stine, A/K/A Stiney Officer Timothy Eiler Officer James Edwards

    120 F.3d 446 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 11, 1997

    Qualified Immunity A. … immunity protects “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

    Cited 111 timesPublished
  • Binkowski v. Family & Children's Services Agency

    39 F. Supp. 2d 882 · District Court, W.D. Michigan · Dec 3, 1998

    It is not enough for a plaintiff to allege that the right to due process of law is “clearly established” under the Fourteenth Amendment. … However, qualified immunity applies only to individuals, not government entities. See, e.g., Leatherman v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Ginter v. Stallcup

    869 F.2d 384 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 6, 1989

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Ginter challenges the decision to grant qualified immunity to Blasingame and Lee before allowing her to conduct discovery in this case. … Ginter to violate any statutory or constitutional right which had been “clearly established” prior to June 3, 1983.

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • Roy George, Shirley George and Sherrod Fitts v. City of St. Louis, Robert Scheetz, Albert Upchurch and Brian Gilmore

    26 F.3d 55 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 6, 1994

    In other words, to decide whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, “a court must determine whether the official’s action was objectively legally reasonable in light of the legal rules that were clearly established … to qualified immunity and the district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the Defendants.

    Cited 29 timesPublished
  • Hampton Co. Nat. Sur., LLC v. Tunica County, Miss.

    543 F.3d 221 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 18, 2008

    An uncertain right cannot be “a clearly established” right. Qualified immunity applies to the claim that Sheriff Hamp violated Due Process rights. … Unlike in the determination of qualified immunity for the Sheriff, the County cannot rely on there being no clearly established right when the Sheriff acted.

    Cited 63 timesPublished
  • Craig v. Wetzel

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 22, 2025

    Qualified immunity applies to federal and state actors unless (1) the facts, taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, demonstrate a violation, and (2) the alleged right was clearly established … Supp. 623, 630-33 (D.N.J.), aff’d, 889 F.2d 1286 (3d Cir. 1989) (denying qualified immunity to a prison board based on prisoners’ clearly established right to a “safe prison environment” free from inmate violence

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Muhammad v. Close

    798 F. Supp. 2d 869 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Jul 8, 2011

    Qualified immunity The defendant first raised the issue of qualified immunity in its supplemental brief in this Court after the latest remand. In English v. … Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that protects government actors performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages when them conduct does “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Spencer v. Pew

    District Court, D. Arizona · Mar 11, 2021

    Qualified Immunity 9 Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages unless their 10 conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … In deciding 12 if qualified immunity applies, a court must determine: (1) whether the facts alleged show 13 the defendant’s conduct violated a constitutional right; and (2) whether that right was 14 clearly established

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Clay v. Woodbury County

    982 F. Supp. 2d 904 · District Court, N.D. Iowa · Nov 6, 2013

    Clay’s reliance on a “generalized right” to be free from an unreasonable search is not sufficient to “clearly establish” the specific right on which her claim hangs for purposes of “qualified immunity.” … Turning to the second prong of the “qualified immunity” analysis, whether the right was “clearly established,” see Burton, 731 F.3d at 791-92 , the decisions in Hicks v.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Megatel Homes LLC v. City of Mansfield, Texas

    District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 6, 2025

    The City’s assertion that the Sherman Act claims should be dismissed because it is entitled to state-action immunity is more than an affirmative defense. Like qualified immunity, where it’s available, see Stramaski v. … And, like qualified immunity, Parker immunity is not jurisdictional. See, e.g., Teladoc v. Tex. Med. Bd., 1-15-CV-343 RP, 2015 WL 8773509, at *6 (W.D. Tex.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Jeffrey Moldowan v. Maureen Fournier

    570 F.3d 698 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 1, 2009

    Defendants’ Qualified Immunity Claims Generally speaking, the rationale underlying the qualified immunity doctrine is that, “where an official’s duties legitimately require action in which clearly established rights are not … qualified immunity.

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Kemp v. Lawyer

    846 F. Supp. 2d 1170 · District Court, D. Colorado · Feb 8, 2012

    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 … § 1983 against Defendant Turano, I do not address the second prong of the two-part qualified immunity test-namely, whether the alleged constitutional violation was clearly established at the time of the incident.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Tucker v. Faith Bible Chapel Int'l.

    36 F.4th 1021 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 7, 2022

    favor in order to answer the legal question of whether the plaintiff has asserted a clearly established constitutional violation. … Consider qualified immunity, which shields government officials from suits for damages unless the official violates a clearly established federal constitutional or statutory right.

    Cited 63 timesPublished
  • Searle v. Town of Bucksport

    3 A.3d 390 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 31, 2010

    The immunity exceptions are strictly construed so as to adhere to immunity as the general rule. Sanford v. … The remaining issue is whether they qualify as an appurtenance to a public building. 1.

    Cited 27 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.