Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2016

10,000+ results

2.89s

  • Walter v. Pike County, Pennsylvania

    465 F. Supp. 2d 409 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 29, 2006

    If the law was clearly established, the qualified immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct. … See, e.g., Smith, 318 F.3d at 510 (finding that the state-created danger doctrine was clearly established by the year 1999).

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Gorman v. Mississippi

    258 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 timesPublished
  • Candido v. Polymers, Inc.

    166 Vt. 15 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Nov 8, 1996

    Having found that Polymers qualifies as Candido’s employer under the statute, Polymers is immune from Candido’s attempted common-law negligence suit under the Act’s employer-immunity provision. 21 V.S.A. § 622. … Candido clearly accepted Polymers’s direction and control.

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Carrie Melear and Willie Stewart v. Wayne Spears, Etc., Ron Averitt, Etc.

    862 F.2d 1177 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 12, 1989

    Qualified Immunity. Avirett argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity in his personal capacity regarding the claims of both Stewart and Melear. … of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.

    Cited 117 timesPublished
  • Brenes-Laroche v. Toledo Davila

    682 F. Supp. 2d 179 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jan 26, 2010

    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 … In conducting our qualified immunity analysis, we take the Plaintiffs facts as true for purposes of determining whether Defendants have violated his constitutional rights and whether the right at issue was clearly established

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Maltby v. Winston

    36 F.3d 548 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 14, 1994

    clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … immunity when probable cause is at issue is clearly erroneous and not de novo.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Dayna Lee v. David Russ

    33 F.4th 860 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 6, 2022

    The district court granted Russ qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity protects Russ unless (1) he violated Groom’s constitutional rights and (2) those rights were clearly established at the time. White v. Pauly, 137 S. Ct. 548, 551 (2017) (per curiam).

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Doe v. Aguilar

    400 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 timesPublished
  • Melvin Taylor v. Edward Reilly, Jr.

    685 F.3d 1110 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 17, 2012

    or, in the alternative, qualified immunity. … The Court has explained, for example, that although “the right to due process of law is quite clearly established by the Due Process Clause,” that level of generality is too high for purposes of qualified immunity because

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Marsilio v. Vigluicci

    924 F. Supp. 2d 837 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 14, 2013

    Plaintiff has not satisfied her burden of establishing that Defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity. Doc. 20, p. 6. … that was clearly established at the time in question.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Garcia v. Webb County District Attorney

    764 F. Supp. 457 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 12, 1991

    Thus absolute immunity is not a protection to Defendant Garcia in his role as an employer; at best, Defendant Garcia has only qualified immunity for his alleged misbehavior in the instant case. Qualified Immunity. … Defendant Garcia has not established entitlement to qualified immunity on Plaintiff’s First Amendment claim, and he does not have absolute immunity.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Provencio v. Vazquez

    258 F.R.D. 626 · District Court, E.D. California · Jul 29, 2009

    immunity because the violation was not “clearly established.” cf. … Turning to the two factors for qualified immunity identified in Saucier the court on this issue will first inquire into whether the right was “clearly established.”

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Brown v. City of Milwaukee

    288 F. Supp. 2d 962 · District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Oct 21, 2003

    Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that even if Garcia violated plaintiffs Fourth Amendment rights, he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Parker v. Gerrish

    547 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 5, 2008

    Though the motion did not refer to "qualified immunity" or to "clearly established law," Gerrish contends he adequately raised that issue. … Gerrish did not refer to "clearly established law" and made no effort to address his argument to qualified immunity.

    Abrogated on other grounds by Bloate v. United States, 559 U.S. 196 (2010)Cited 113 timesPublished
  • Ellsberg v. Mitchell

    670 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 20, 1984

    on the Supreme Court’s new qualified immunity test enunciated in Harlow v. … Harlow disposed of the “subjective” aspect of qualified immunity and held that courts should examine only the “objective reasonableness of an official’s conduct, as measured by reference to ‘clearly established’ law.”

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • VanHorn v. Nebraska State Racing Commission

    304 F. Supp. 2d 1151 · District Court, D. Nebraska · Jan 27, 2004

    Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects government officials from damage liability unless their discretionary acts violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. See Harlow v. … The defendants are entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff has alleged the violation of a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. Hafley v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • McCormack v. Livergood

    353 F. Supp. 3d 357 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 7, 2018

    The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that government officials performing "discretionary functions," are shielded from suit if their conduct did not violate a "clearly established statutory or constitutional right[ … were "clearly established" at the time of the incident.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Ricker v. Leapley

    25 F.3d 1406 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 7, 1994

    Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … We have concluded that both Leapley and Weber are entitled to qualified immunity because Ricker has failed to allege a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 48 timesPublished
  • Carswell v. Borough Of Homestead

    381 F.3d 235 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 20, 2004

    constitutional sense and the ruling on qualified immunity. … Saucier emphasized that the inquiry for qualified immunity eligibility is distinct from establishment of a constitutional violation of excessive force.

    Cited 59 timesPublished
  • Peter Klassen v. Gaines County, Texas, and Gaines County Deputy Sheriffs Ken Ketron and Clint Low

    Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland) · Jul 15, 2021

    “[O]fficers are entitled to qualified immunity under [42 U.S.C.] § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time. … doctrine of qualified immunity only applies to “individuals.”

    Cited 0 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.