Case law

Cárdenas v. Muangman

998 A.2d 303 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 17, 2010

Analysis of Appellants’ Expert’s Testimony Because the requirements for qualifying an expert to testify and assessing the qualified expert’s testimony for sufficiency overlap, they are susceptible to being confused. … apply District of Columbia law (and therefore allow Camacho’s claim to proceed) under the conflict of laws analysis used in that state. 10 The “potential interests of the jurisdictions involved,” Stutsman, 546 A.2d at 374, clearly

Walker v. Schwalbe

112 F.3d 1127 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 15, 1997

Standard of Review A district court’s ruling that an official’s conduct violated clearly established law so that the official is not entitled to a ruling of qualified immunity prior to trial is reviewed de novo. … Qualified Immunity Even though Walker has established a genuine issue of material fact, the defendants may be protected from liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity.

LaShay v. DEPT. OF SOCIAL & REHAB. SERV.

625 A.2d 224 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Jan 15, 1993

We have recognized two degrees of official immunity: absolute *227 immunity and qualified immunity. Id., 151 Vt. at 184-85 , 559 A.2d at 1078 . … "Good faith exists where an official's acts did not violate clearly established rights of which the official reasonably should have known." Murray v. White, 155 Vt. 621, 630 , 587 A.2d 975, 980 (1991).

MICHAEL DOLINSKI v. BOROUGH OF WATCHUNG (L-1080-19, SOMERSET COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 8, 2022

Plaintiff argues the motion judge erred in granting defendant Cina qualified immunity. Citing Morillo v. … State, 230 N.J. 84, 98 (2017) (holding a governmental official is entitled to qualified immunity unless it is established that a clearly established constitutional right was violated).

Anna Wealot v. Alvin Brooks

865 F.3d 1119 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 4, 2017

Section 1983 Claims Qualified immunity protects government officials from incurring civil liability as long as “‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … To overcome the shield of qualified immunity, a plaintiffs claim must state a violation of a clearly established federal right, and that right must have been clearly established at the time of the violation. See Nord v.

Berkley Specialty Insurance Company v. Masterforce Construction Corp.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 26, 2021

judgment on the pleadings.27 Berkley asserts that it is entitled to judgment in its favor as, for five reasons, it owed no duty to indemnify Masterforce.28 First, Berkley contends that Masterforce’s conduct does not qualify … Galloway, 483 F.3d 258, 271 (4th Cir. 2007) (noting that, under the qualified immunity standard, a constitutional right is not clearly established when there are “conflicting decisions” in that area); Soares v.

Wilson v. Falk

877 F.3d 1204 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 19, 2017

DISCUSSION Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials “generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … “When a defendant asserts qualified immunity at summary judgment, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right and (2) the constitutional right was clearly established

Moore v. Vega

371 F.3d 110 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 10, 2004

entitlement to qualified immunity. … : qualified immunity protects that officer unless his performance was in violation of clearly established law, or was plainly incompetent.

Rex Chappell v. R. Mandeville

706 F.3d 1052 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 31, 2013

We hold that both Mandeville and Rosario are entitled to qualified immunity because the law at the time Chappell was on contraband watch did not clearly establish that their actions were unconstitutional. … Whether qualified immunity applies thus “turns on the objective legal reasonableness of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.” Messerschmidt v.

Izen v. Catalina

382 F.3d 566 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 23, 2004

Qualified Immunity The district court offered alternative reasons for holding that Catalina is entitled to qualified immunity. … The second prong of qualified immunity analysis requires us to determine whether the agent’s conduct violated clearly established federal law. Kinney, 367 F.3d at 350 .

Shafer v. County of Santa Barbara

868 F.3d 1110 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 29, 2017

The panel nevertheless held that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity because, at the time the incident occurred, the law was not clearly established that an officer cannot progressively increase his use of force … Prong Two: Clearly Established Law Deputy Padilla may nonetheless be entitled to a qualified immunity defense if Shafer’s Fourth Amendment rights were not clearly established at the time Deputy Padilla committed the

John Dukeman, II v. Dylon Wyatt

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 12, 2026

Once qualified immunity is asserted, the plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating the law confirming his constitutional right was clearly established. Hanson, as Trustee for Layton v. … Trooper Wyatt is entitled to qualified immunity on Dukeman’s claim that he violated a clearly established right by not issuing a canine warning prior to the sheriff’s deputy’s decision to deploy his police canine.

Nicholas Coffey v. Adam Carroll

933 F.3d 577 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 5, 2019

Standard Of Review The qualified immunity doctrine protects public officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Alternatively, for purposes of qualified immunity, the officers say it is not clearly established that entry into a misdemeanor-suspect’s home when officers are in hot pursuit constitutes an unreasonable search.

Ziccardi v. City Of Philadelphia

288 F.3d 57 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 30, 2002

The individual defendants asserted the defense of qualified immunity, but the district court refused to grant summary judgment on that ground. … a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. 4 See Eddy v.

Opinion No. (2005)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Oct 3, 2005

clearly established law"). … Individual District Directors would enjoy qualified immunity that "shields public officials from suit insofar as the official's conduct did not violate any clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

Jeremy Meyers v. Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wi

836 F.3d 818 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2016

In  addition  to  being  a  defense,  however,  sovereign  immunity, like qualified immunity, also bears the character‐ istics  of  “immunity  from  trial  and  the  attendant  burdens  of  litigation.” Abelesz v.  … Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 672 (2009)  (qualified immunity “is both a defense to liability and a lim‐ ited  entitlement  not  to  stand  trial  or  face  the  other  burdens  of litigation.”). 

United States v. Crawford

520 F.3d 1072 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 28, 2008

Under the modified categorical approach, the prior offense may qualify as a career offender predicate offense if “ ‘documentation or judicially noticeable facts ... clearly establish that the conviction is a predicate conviction … “The government has the burden to establish clearly and unequivocally that the conviction was based on all of the elements of a qualifying predicate offense.” Kovac, 367 F.3d at 1119 .

Jamel Walker v. James H. Gomez Kingston W. Prunty R.R. Rath, Correctional Sergeant

370 F.3d 969 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 7, 2004

Defendants also assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity. 6 Under Saucier v. … Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001), we undertake a two-step inquiry in determining whether qualified immunity applies.

Torres v. City of Madera

648 F.3d 1119 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 22, 2011

Qualified Immunity We must next consider whether Officer Noriega is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity because the alleged unlawfulness of her conduct was not clearly established as of October 27, 2002, for the “inquiries … The district court nonetheless determined Officer Noriega was entitled to qualified immunity because the law in 2002 did not clearly establish that an unreasonable mistaken use of force violated the Fourth Amendment.

Doninger v. Niehoff

642 F.3d 334 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 25, 2011

established, we affirm the district court’s decision on the ground that 9 Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. … issue was clearly 13 established in certain respects.”