Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1861

10,000+ results

0.73s

  • Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles

    891 F.3d 776 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 30, 2018

    Qualified Immunity under Federal Law Qualified immunity under federal law protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … “An officer is not entitled to qualified immunity on the grounds that the law is not clearly established every time a novel method is used to inflict injury.” Mendoza v. Block, 27 F.3d 1357, 1362 (9th Cir. 1994).

    Cited 488 timesPublished
  • Bender v. General Services Administration

    539 F. Supp. 2d 702 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 5, 2008

    Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability for constitutional torts “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which *713 a reasonable person … Qualified immunity protects a defendant from suits for violations only of constitutional rights that are not "clearly established” at the time of the alleged violation. Saucier v.

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Clerkley v. Holcomb

    121 F.4th 1359 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 26, 2024

    Our review is thus confined to qualified immunity’s two prongs: whether the facts “suffice to show a legal violation” and “whether that law was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” Id. … The district court correctly denied him qualified immunity, so we affirm. 8 Holcomb finally argues that the district court erred by implying that a jury could decide the issue of clearly established law

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Wachtler v. County Of Herkimer

    35 F.3d 77 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 9, 1994

    Vehicle & Traffic Law Sec. 1800(a). 20 We have held that the Fourth Amendment proscription of strip-searches of misdemeanor arrestees without reasonable suspicion is clearly enough established to preclude the defense of qualified … Thus, the individual defendants involved in the strip-search are entitled to qualified immunity. 2 23 Herkimer County, however, does not have qualified immunity, Owen v.

    Abrogated on other grounds by Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington, 132 S. Ct. 1510 (2012)Cited 95 timesPublished
  • Adeyemi v. Office of General Counsel for Booth Police Officers, National Security Agency

    District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 20, 2021

    Adeyemi has not alleged facts amounting to a violation of the Fourth Amendment or any other “clearly established” constitutional right, the booth police officers would be entitled to qualified immunity as to his claims … Vill. of Pinehurst, 810 F.3d 892, 907 (4th Cir. 2016) (“Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages, provided that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Henderson Amusement, Inc. v. Good

    172 F. Supp. 2d 751 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Nov 2, 2001

    Even if this officer’s purported conduct had violated a clearly established rule of law (which no one can argue that it did), he would still be entitled to immunity if he reasonably believed his conduct was lawful. … If it is undisputed that the right allegedly violated was clearly established at the time, the defendant asserting a qualified-immunity defense may still be immune from damages for violation of that right if, under the circumstances

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Stanley v. Cooper

    996 F. Supp. 316 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 10, 1998

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The doctrine of qualified immunity entitles public officers to be shielded from liability for damages unless their conduct violates clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … But such actions did not so clearly violate Stanley’s rights that defendant Cooper should be deprived of the defense of qualified immunity.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Johnson Ex Rel. Cano v. Holmes

    377 F. Supp. 2d 1039 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Sep 30, 2004

    Once a defendant raises the- qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff must “come forward with facts or allegations sufficient to show both that the defendant’s alleged conduct violated the law and that [the] law was clearly … If the plaintiff meets this two-part burden, the defendant “assumes the normal summary judgment burden of establishing that no material facts that would defeat his claim for qualified immunity remain in dispute.”

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Mahoney v. Hankin

    844 F.2d 64 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 12, 1988

    clearly established at the time of the conduct in issue.” … In evaluating Hankin’s qualified immunity defense to these allegations, we must assess the “objective legal reasonableness” of his actions “in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time [those actions

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • William C. Bennett, AKA John A. Richardson v. Garrison A. Parker, Warden, Robert M. Jackson, Officer, Daniel W. Cooper, Officer

    898 F.2d 1530 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 25, 1990

    Although intertwined with issues of jurisdiction and qualified immunity, this appeal concerns the severity of injury to an inmate required to establish a constitutional claim of excessive use of force. … The doctrine of qualified immunity accomplishes a similar purpose by shielding public officials from civil liability when their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

    Cited 182 timesPublished
  • Better Government Bureau, Inc. v. McGraw

    106 F.3d 582 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 6, 1997

    We hold, therefore, that an official who performs an act clearly established to be beyond the scope of his discretionary authority is not entitled to claim qualified immunity under § 1983. … established for qualified immunity purposes.”

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Kissner v. Orr

    District Court, E.D. Michigan · Nov 17, 2022

    The Court, however, did not dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Orr or Rogers based on qualified immunity. … See Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818-19 (“If the law at that time was not clearly established, an official could not reasonably be expected to anticipate subsequent legal developments, nor could he fairly be said to “know” that

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Nguyen v. Louisiana State Board of Cosmetology

    236 F. Supp. 3d 947 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Feb 20, 2017

    Qualified Immunity “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 … Qualified Immunity on Plaintiffs’ Race Discrimination Claims The right to be free from invidious racial discrimination is clearly established. See, e.g., Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 , 25 L.Ed. 664 (1880).

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Ellis v. City of Indianapolis

    800 F. Supp. 733 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 24, 1992

    clearly established. … Qualified Immunity Defense Applies to Wynalda’s Conduct The question whether qualified immunity attaches to an officer’s conduct is always one for the judge to decide. Simkunas v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Dooley v. St. Louis County

    187 S.W.3d 882 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 4, 2006

    from liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … “Qualified immunity protects public officials from personal liability under [Section] 1983 when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Williams v. Wapinsky

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 26, 2024

    A qualified immunity determination involves a two-pronged inquiry: (1) whether a constitutional or federal right has been violated; and (2) whether that right was “clearly established.” Saucier v. … Given that Williams has failed to allege that Defendants violated a clearly established right in this setting, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on this Eighth Amendment claim. IV.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Allah v. Juchenwioz

    176 F. App'x 187 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 12, 2006

    which the Court found to exist in its 1999 decision was not clearly established at the relevant time.” … “In general, public officials are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe their acts did not

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • McPherson v. Auger

    842 F. Supp. 25 · District Court, D. Maine · Jan 6, 1994

    Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 641 , 107 S.Ct. 3034, 3039 , 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (establishing the standard for assessing whether an officer is shielded from civil liability suits by qualified immunity). … Hence, Defendant Auger is protected by qualified immunity from Plaintiffs civil damages suit.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Anderson v. City of Bellevue

    862 F. Supp. 2d 1095 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 23, 2012

    Qualified Immunity 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 … was clearly established at the time of the violation.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Ronnie Jackson v. Jeff Gutzmer

    866 F.3d 969 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 10, 2017

    This is an interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity, a doctrine that “shields a government official from liability unless his conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … “The immunity standard in Harlow itself eliminates all motive-based claims in which the official’s conduct did not violate clearly established law.” Id. at 592.

    Cited 117 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.