Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2016

10,000+ results

1.91s

  • Mary Roe v. Texas Department Of Protective And Regulatory Services

    299 F.3d 395 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 13, 2002

    established" in the context of qualified immunity. … established" for purposes of qualified immunity. 19 It is difficult to argue that a matter of law is clearly established for state actors in this circuit where this court has not opined on the issue in question and the other

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • Outlaw v. City of Hartford

    884 F.3d 351 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 7, 2018

    Holloway, 510 U.S. 510, 516 (1994). 7 Allen contends that in December 2004, the law governing his conduct 8 was not sufficiently clearly established because "it was not clearly established that an 9 … Creighton, 483 U.S. at 640-41. 15 Where the right at issue in the circumstances confronting police officers was clearly 16 established but was violated, the officer will still be entitled to qualified immunity if 17

    Cited 194 timesPublished
  • Pyne v. Meese

    172 Cal. App. 3d 392 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 22, 1985

    Under the Harlow test, Black and Hurd did not violate any clearly established statutory or constitutional rights and are thus immune from liability. … Once again, we must apply the Harlow test to determine whether a qualified immunity exists.

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Barnette v. Folmar

    64 F.3d 598 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 15, 1995

    The district court denied summary judgment based on qualified immunity to all defendants on plaintiffs' constructive discharge claim and granted summary judgment based on qualified immunity to all the … No case binding in this circuit clearly established as a legal matter that plaintiffs' resignations were, in these circumstances, discharges.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Henrise v. Horvath

    174 F. Supp. 2d 493 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 30, 2001

    Conversely, an official’s conduct is not protected by qualified immunity if, in light of clearly established pre-existing law, it was apparent the conduct, when undertaken, would be a violation of the right at issue. … To preclude qualified immunity, it is not necessary for a plaintiff to establish that “the [specific] action in question has previously been held unlawful.” Anderson v.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • James Covington v. Veronica Paris

    2021 DNH 005 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Jun 7, 2021

    In addition, Paris may be entitled to qualified immunity. … If Paris invokes qualified immunity from Covington’s claim that her actions violated his Eighth Amendment rights, to overcome the immunity, Covington must show that his Eighth Amendment right was clearly established during

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Hill v. Washington State Department of Corrections

    628 F. Supp. 2d 1250 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 31, 2009

    Second, Plaintiffs contend that no individual Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity because a reasonable person would know that enforcing the DOC Policy violates a clearly established constitutional right. … Qualified Immunity Defendants also urge that they are entitled to qualified immunity because Plaintiffs have not alleged violation of a clearly established constitutional right and the pre-conviction eligibility requirement

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Turpin v. District of Columbia

    District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 2024

    Thus, an officer conducting a search “is entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment.” Pearson, 555 U.S. at 243–44. … But even putting aside the different facts that case presented, a decision of a district court cannot clearly establish the law for qualified immunity purposes.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Angle v. Dow

    822 F. Supp. 1530 · District Court, S.D. Alabama · Jun 1, 1993

    anal *1538 ysis public officials will be entitled to qualified immunity in two situations: 1) when the law that they allegedly violated is not clearly established; and 2) when the law is clearly established and the Court … Therefore, the Court will examine the clearly established law, the second step of qualified immunity analysis. Defendants rely entirely on Dartland v.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Jenny Wernsing, Charles Bingaman and Troy Cannon v. Odell Thompson, Jr.

    423 F.3d 732 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 9, 2005

    The district court also rejected Thompson’s claim of qualified immunity, holding that it was clearly established that Thompson’s alleged actions restricting or retaliating against plaintiffs’ speech on matters of public concern … If the clearly established question could be resolved merely by observing that unjustified prior restraints on speech are prohibited, then no defendant could ever prevail on the clearly established prong of the qualified

    Cited 91 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
  • Gonzalez Gonzalez v. Zayas

    671 F. Supp. 106 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Aug 17, 1987

    III.Qualified Immunity In actions brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , a defense of qualified immunity from liability for damages is available to state executive officers performing discretionary functions, “insofar as their … conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Harris v. Champion

    51 F.3d 901 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 30, 1995

    [T]he plaintiff must do more than identify in the abstract a clearly established right and allege that the defendant has violated it. … , or establish that defendants’ actions were clearly prohibited at the time they were taken. 5 See id.

    Superseded by statute, as recognized in Knox v. BlandCited 47 timesPublished
  • Pace v. City of Palmetto

    489 F. Supp. 2d 1325 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 12, 2007

    In this Circuit, the law may be “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes only by opinions from the United States Supreme Court, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal, or the highest court of the state in whose … Therefore, based on the particular *1336 factual circumstances in which Ahler acted and the lack of “clearly established” case law, this Court concludes that Ahler is entitled to qualified immunity on Pace’s § 1983 claim.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Keeble v. Cisneros

    664 F. Supp. 1076 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 15, 1987

    Against this statutory and factual background, the various individual Defendants claim absolute and qualified immunity. … A qualified immunity protects a public official from liability unless his conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Sophia Wilansky v. Morton County, North Dakota

    Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 24, 2026

    To overcome qualified immunity, Wilansky must point to law clearly establishing that Officer Moll seized her. Keup, -7- 159 F.4th at 538. … But because qualified immunity is at issue, she has to show that violation was clearly established. See, e.g., Webster v. St.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Walton v. NM State Land Office

    821 F.3d 1204 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 19, 2016

    Powell submits that his actions weren’t clearly forbidden by existing law at the time he took them so he’s entitled to qualified immunity. … Powell rightly notes that, to avoid a qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must show not only that her federal constitutional or statutory rights were violated but also that they were so “clearly established” at the

    Cited 51 timesPublished
  • Craighead v. Lee

    399 F.3d 954 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 18, 2005

    Paul moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity as to the Section 1983 claims and based on official immunity as to the state-law claims. … Wilson held that summary judgment on qualified immunity was inappropriate because "[t]he current record does not conclusively establish the reasonableness of the officers' actions or beliefs." Wilson, 293 F.3d at 454.

    Cited 45 timesPublished
  • Fountain v. Talley

    104 F. Supp. 2d 1345 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Feb 25, 2000

    Collier clearly establishes the law. … The law can be "clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the United States Supreme Court, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals or the highest court of the state where the case arose.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • D.M. v. State

    25 Neb. Ct. App. 596 · Nebraska Court of Appeals · Mar 13, 2018

    Qualified immunity provides a shield from liability for public officials sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) in their individual capacities, so long as the official’s conduct does not violate clearly established … clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.

    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.