Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2016

10,000+ results

0.75s

  • Witzke v. City of Bismarck

    718 N.W.2d 586 · North Dakota Supreme Court · Jul 18, 2006

    of the State’s case at trial, and other conduct intimately associated with the judicial process, but that prosecutors have only the protection of qualified immunity when functioning in the role of an administrator or investigative … Absolute immunity defeats a suit at the outset, while an official with qualified immunity must establish his or her conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

    Cited 33 timesPublished
  • Cynthia Archer v. John Chisholm

    870 F.3d 603 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2017

    It  granted  the  Investigators’  motion  for  judgment  on  the  pleadings on qualified immunity grounds and noted that the  Prosecutors also were entitled to qualified immunity.  …  right that was clearly established at the time of  the challenged conduct.” 

    Cited 281 timesPublished
  • Debbie Floyd v. Larry Laws, and City of Sherwood, a Municipal Corporation

    929 F.2d 1390 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 30, 1991

    Because these rights are clearly established, Floyd contends, defendant Laws was not entitled to a jury instruction on qualified immunity. … If Floyd’s line of reasoning were correct, then any plaintiff could preclude her opponent’s qualified immunity defense simply by alleging violations of clearly established constitutional rights.

    Cited 244 timesPublished
  • NUON v. City of Lowell

    768 F. Supp. 2d 323 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 4, 2011

    The principle of qualified immunity shields a police officer from liability for civil damages when his conduct does not violate clearly-established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … On this point, Kinney would not be entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 27 timesPublished
  • Angela McCullough v. Ernest N. Finley, Jr.

    907 F.3d 1324 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 29, 2018

    The Mayor and the Chiefs Enjoy Qualified and State-Agent Immunity from the Jailees’ Complaint. … “Qualified immunity shields government officials acting within their discretionary authority from liability unless the officials ‘violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

    Cited 300 timesPublished
  • Altony Brooks v. Captain Jacumin

    924 F.3d 104 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 10, 2019

    In the alternative, the officers invoked qualified immunity: Even if Brooks’s Eighth Amendment rights had been violated by the malicious use of force, they contended, the law was not so clearly established that they would … immunity grounds because the law did not clearly establish that violation.

    Cited 235 timesPublished
  • Holley v. COUNTY OF ORANGE, NY

    625 F. Supp. 2d 131 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 14, 2009

    Qualified immunity shields government officials whose conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Thus, a qualified immunity defense is established where “(a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant to believe that his action did not violate

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Meyers v. Yamato Kogyo Co.

    2020 Ark. 136 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 9, 2020

    They were not involved in employment decisions at Arkansas Steel Associates, such as hiring or firing employees, paying wages, training, providing workers’ compensation or other benefits, or establishing work schedules. … In other words, “referential and qualifying phrases, where no contrary intention appears, relate only to the last antecedent.”

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Rossignol v. Voorhaar

    321 F. Supp. 2d 642 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 5, 2004

    to summary judgment based on qualified immunity. 4 Qualified immunity is a doctrine that shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages when “their conduct does not violate … clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Dean v. Thomas

    933 F. Supp. 600 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Jul 1, 1996

    However, this “qualified immunity” is defeated if the defendant official took the complained-of action “with the malicious intention to cause a deprivation of rights,” or the official violated clearly established statutory … Officials are not ordinarily entitled to the protection of qualified immunity if clearly established constitutional rights have been violated.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Jorge E. Cancel Lugo v. Carlos Alvarado, Etc.

    819 F.2d 5 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · May 26, 1987

    The district court ruled that where the discovery was not directed solely at damage issues related to the qualified immunity defense (i.e., “matters of personal motivations, related to the subjective components of the qualified … The qualified immunity inquiry involves not only the question of "whether the legal norms allegedly violated by the defendant were clearly established at the time of the challenged actions,” Mitchell v.

    Cited 29 timesPublished
  • Meyer v. Woodward

    617 F. Supp. 2d 554 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Oct 9, 2008

    Plaintiff argues that Defendant Woodward is not entitled to qualified immunity because of two clearly established rights. First, Plaintiff argues that he has a clearly established right to refuse medical treatment. … Defendants Woodward and Carter also assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity because any constitutional violation was not of a “clearly established right.”

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Nicol v. Auburn-Washburn USD 437

    231 F. Supp. 2d 1092 · District Court, D. Kansas · Nov 1, 2002

    Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects state actors from liability when acting within the scope of their employment. … Ordinarily, for a law to be clearly established, “there must be a Supreme Court or Tenth Circuit decision" on point, or the clearly established weight of authority from other courts must have found the law to be as the plaintiff

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Doe v. City of Chicago

    883 F. Supp. 1126 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 16, 1994

    Qualified Immunity Dr. Bransfield moves to dismiss the Section 504 claim against him on grounds of qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Stewart v. City of Prairie Village

    904 F. Supp. 2d 1143 · District Court, D. Kansas · Oct 17, 2012

    immunity, Plaintiff must show that the right was clearly established. 23 The Court “cannot find qualified immunity wherever we have a new fact pattern.” 24 The Tenth Circuit has “shifted the qualified immunity analysis from … A plaintiff must show a violation of a clearly established constitutional right for each defendant in a § 1983 suit who claims qualified immunity; 47 § 1983 does not give a plaintiff a right of action against an individual

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Davis v. Powell

    901 F. Supp. 2d 1196 · District Court, S.D. California · Oct 4, 2012

    Qualified Immunity All of the Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity from liability on the First and Fourteenth Amendment claims because they did not violate clearly established constitutional law, and they … Castro, 621 F.3d at 1199 (stating that courts can grant qualified immunity on the basis of the clearly established prong alone) (citing Rowlands, 606 F.3d at 651 ).

    Cited 48 timesPublished
  • Tina Marie Sellers, by and Through Her Guardian, Natural Mother, and Next Friend, Joann Sellers Albert F. Deuser Phyllis Menke v. Robert J. Baer John J. Frank James E. Mosbacher William H. Young Mayor Vincent Schoemehl Lawrence J. King United States of America, David Vecera, National Park Ranger Edward Bridges, National Park Ranger Dennis Burnett, Chief Ranger, Tina Marie Sellers, by and Through Her Guardian, Natural Mother, and Next Friend, Joann Sellers Albert F. Deuser Phyllis Menke v. Robert J. Baer John J. Frank James E. Mosbacher William H. Young Mayor Vincent Schoemehl Lawrence J. King United States of America, David Vecera, National Park Ranger Edward Bridges, National Park Ranger Dennis Burnett, Chief Ranger, Tina Marie Sellers, by and Through Her Guardian, Natural Mother, and Next Friend, Joann Sellers Albert F. Deuser Phyllis Menke v. Robert J. Baer John J. Frank James E. Mosbacher William H. Young Mayor Vincent Schoemehl Lawrence J. King, United States of America David Vecera, National Park Ranger Edward Bridges, National Park Ranger Dennis Burnett, Chief Ranger

    28 F.3d 895 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 16, 1994

    established under current law. 6 Accordingly, Vecera, Bridges, Burnett, and King are entitled to qualified immunity. … We hold that the conduct of the officers did not violate a clearly established constitutional right of which a reasonable officer would have known, and the officers therefore are entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Bernstein v. Lopez

    321 F.3d 903 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 4, 2003

    We hold that no further facts need to be determined and that as a matter of law the defendants are protected by qualified immunity because the plaintiffs have no clearly established right to continue in their administrative … This property interest, they maintain, was “clearly established.”

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • State v. Andrews

    424 S.C. 304 · Court of Appeals of South Carolina · Jul 18, 2018

    On appeal, Andrews argues the circuit court erred in (1) denying him immunity under the Protection of Persons and Property Act 1 **308 (the Act) due to inconsistent witness testimony, (2) refusing to qualify Investigator … He stated shootings typically caused "memory fragmentation[, a]nd after a couple of sleep cycles[,] you're able to consolidate your memories" and remember the event more clearly.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • State of Michigan v. Brandon McQueen

    Michigan Supreme Court · Feb 8, 2013

    ’s immunity provision clearly contemplates that a registered qualifying patient’s medical use of marijuana only occur for the purpose of alleviating his own debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with his … they are clearly erroneous.31 A ruling is clearly erroneous “if the reviewing court is left with a definite and firm conviction that the trial court made a mistake.”32 III.

    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.