Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1980

10,000+ results

4.89s

  • Parks v. Warren Correctional Institution

    51 F. App'x 137 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 13, 2002

    allegedly infringed was “clearly established[.]” … cannot review the issue of qualified immunity.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Edwards v. Quiros

    986 F.3d 187 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 27, 2021

    Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages as long as the officials’ conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … a reasonable person would have known.” 1 Because the district court found that prisoners do not have a clearly established right “to recreate free from restraints,” it granted qualified immunity to the defendants. 2

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • C.B. v. Sonora School District

    691 F. Supp. 2d 1123 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 22, 2009

    Qualified Immunity. … Qualified immunity serves to shield 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 would

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Villagrana v. Kernan

    District Court, N.D. California · Jun 12, 2025

    immunity grounds. … Under Ninth Circuit law, qualified immunity is not 4 available to private defendants in a section 1983 suit. Danielson v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • 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
  • McGovern v. City of Minneapolis

    480 N.W.2d 121 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Jan 21, 1992

    Qualified immunity The individual officers argue they are entitled to qualified immunity against respondents’ claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . We agree. … Whether qualified immunity exists turns on whether the officials violated clearly-established statutory or constitutional rights, the existence of which a reasonable person would have known.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Aczel v. Labonia

    92 F. App'x 17 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Feb 12, 2004

    facts plaintiff invokes constitutional rights that were clearly established at the time of the event. … established at the time.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Henderson v. City of Philadelphia

    853 F. Supp. 2d 514 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 2012

    Qualified Immunity Defense counsel argues that Gress is entitled to qualified immunity. … Clearly, his actions were not objectively reasonable and were not done in good faith. Counsel has not provided any other reason why Gress would be entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 33 timesPublished
  • Wendell Domina v. George VanPelt

    235 F.3d 1091 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 26, 2000

    show a violation of clearly established law. … The commissioners would nonetheless be protected by qualified immunity if in early 1998 (the time of their alleged misconduct) it was not clearly established that the speech in which Mr.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Alberto F. Morales v. James Haynes and Virginia Perez, Revenue Officers of Irs

    890 F.2d 708 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 9, 1989

    We hold that the plaintiffs have not shown that the defendants violated any “clearly established” right and that the defendants are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity. We therefore reverse. … established” as to deprive the defendant of his qualified immunity. 702 F.2d at 584 .

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Knight Ex Rel. Kerr v. Miami-Dade County

    856 F.3d 795 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 5, 2017

    As this Court has often observed, “qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities as long as their conduct violates no clearly established statutory or constitutional … “[T]o receive qualified immunity, an official must first establish that he was acting within the scope of his discretionary authority when the allegedly wrongful acts occurred.”

    Cited 186 timesPublished
  • Bradford v. Wiggins

    516 F.3d 1189 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 20, 2008

    If so, we must then determine *1196 whether the right was clearly established. Id. … right was clearly established.

    Cited 27 timesPublished
  • Velharticky v. Independent School District No. 3 of Roger Mills County

    846 F. Supp. 941 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · May 17, 1993

    Therefore, the Court grants summary judgment in favor of all Defendants and against Plaintiff. 2 QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity is available to government officials unless they violate clearly established statutory … Clearly, the board members receipt of complaints and other investigative activities does not violate a clearly established law.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • David Kenyon v. Clayton Edwards

    462 F.3d 802 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 7, 2006

    We find that Edwards is entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity. A. The Qualified Immunity Analysis Saucier provides the marching orders for courts considering qualified immunity claims. … If the law did not put the officer on notice that his conduct would be clearly unlawful, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is appropriate.

    Cited 1 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
  • Edwards v. Gilbert

    867 F.2d 1271 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 28, 1989

    Joyner, 865 F.2d 1187, 1189 (11th Cir.1989). 6 Once a defendant advances a defense of qualified immunity, he is entitled to summary judgment unless "the legal norms allegedly violated by the defendant were clearly established … established" for purposes of qualified immunity at the time of Molbert's death.

    Cited 85 timesPublished
  • Duran v. City of Douglas

    904 F.2d 1372 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 4, 1990

    However, the Supreme Court has established a limited exception to this rule: “[A] district court’s denial of a claim of qualified immunity, to the extent that it turns on an issue of law, is an appealable ‘final decision’ … The legal issues involved in that appeal — whether Aguilar violated clearly established constitutional protections — are identical to those governing the question of Aguilar’s qualified immunity.

    Cited 63 timesPublished
  • Courtney Richmond v. City of Brooklyn

    490 F.3d 1002 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 21, 2007

    “Qualified immunity protects a government official from liability in a section 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would … Therefore, we proceed directly to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, which asks whether the asserted constitutional right was clearly established.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Thomas v. Murray

    107 F. Supp. 2d 748 · District Court, N.D. Texas · May 31, 2000

    Murray contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity because his actions did not violate clearly established federal law. … clearly established in June 1996.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Smothers v. Gibson

    778 F.2d 470 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 27, 1985

    ANALYSIS Whether an official may prevail in his qualified immunity defense depends upon the “objective unreasonableness of [his] conduct as measured by reference to clearly established law.” … The Cummins Unit argues that it should be accorded qualified immunity from liability for damages because the law of prison visitor strip searches was not clearly established in 1981.

    Cited 12 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.