Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1980

10,000+ results

5.70s

  • Al Shimari v. CACI International, Inc.

    679 F.3d 205 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 14, 2012

    The Iqbal Court concluded that whether a particular constitutional right was clearly established for qualified immunity purposes presents an abstract issue of law that permits an appeal at the' dismissal stage. … established constitutional right); Winfield, 106 F.3d at 530 (recognizing jurisdiction over appeal of denial of qualified immunity insofar as district court ruled on summary judgment that asserted legal right was clearly

    Cited 44 timesPublished
  • Anastasio v. WEST ORANGE TP. PLAN. BD.

    197 N.J. Super. 457 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 10, 1984

    Since the trial court at the motion to dismiss the complaint had held that the affirmative defense of qualified immunity was available, the next issue to confront the court is the one dealing with qualified immunity. … It then became the task of the Supreme Court to set guidelines for defining the scope of qualified immunity. The guidelines for the scope of qualified immunity were established in the case of Wood v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Arakawa v. Sakata

    133 F. Supp. 2d 1223 · District Court, D. Hawaii · Mar 6, 2001

    , either absolute quasi-judicial immunity, statutory immunity, or qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity protects state and local officials from suit as long as their conduct did not “violate clearly established [federal] statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Kevin Lamar Adams Bobbie Adams v. City of Auburn Hills, a Municipal Corporation, John Backstrom

    336 F.3d 515 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 21, 2003

    Qualified Immunity As the Supreme Court explained in Harlow v. … Whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity depends on: “(1) whether the facts taken in the light most favorable to plaintiff could establish a constitutional violation; (2) whether the right was a ‘clearly established

    Cited 31 timesPublished
  • John Flowers v. City of Diboll Texas, Steve Baker and Kent Havard

    Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler) · May 22, 2013

    Governmental employees are entitled to qualified immunity from civil damages ―insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … Qualified immunity shields a police officer if a reasonable officer could have believed that the action taken was lawful in light of clearly established law and the information the officer possessed. See Hunter v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • John Paff v. George Kaltenbach

    204 F.3d 425 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 28, 2000

    Fields, 178 F.3d 170, 174 (3d Cir. 1999). 17 A court presented with a claim of qualified immunity must examine both the law that was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation and the facts available to the … a right to leaflet peacefully where they were. 59 When an officer violates clearly established law and the facts reasonably known by the officer indisputably show that the officer's conduct was illegal, qualified immunity

    Cited 82 timesPublished
  • Ohio Ex Rel. Manuel v. Ohio Department of Health

    810 F. Supp. 928 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 2, 1992

    An official is entitled to qualified immunity if his actions are objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). … Defendants have qualified immunity unless Plaintiff’s “rights were so clearly established when the acts were committed that any officer in the [Defendant’s position, measured objectively, would have clearly understood that

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Zarate-Martinez v. Echemendia

    299 Ga. 301 · Supreme Court of Georgia · Jul 5, 2016

    (d) Special Privileges and Immunities: Pursuant to Ga. Const. of 1983 Art. I, § I, Par. … Jacobi was not qualified under the statute. This leaves only the two affidavits filed by Dr.

    Cited 40 timesPublished
  • Williams v. Goldsmith

    4 F. Supp. 2d 1112 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Apr 29, 1998

    The Clearly Established Law. In Jenkins v. … immunity, which turns on whether the officer violated clearly established law.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Davdrin Goffin v. Robbie Ashcraft

    957 F.3d 858 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 24, 2020

    Officer Ashcraft is entitled to qualified immunity if her conduct did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Police officers are not entitled to qualified immunity if “(1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time.”

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Dewey O. Mays, Jr., M.D. v. City of Dayton

    134 F.3d 809 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 6, 1998

    The district court denied summary judgment on the qualified immunity issue, finding that Gabringer was not entitled to qualified immunity because: (1) the affidavit filed by Gabringer in application for the search warrant … To overcome a defendant’s motion for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity, the plaintiff must: (1) identify a clearly established right alleged to have been violated; and (2) establish that a reasonable officer

    Cited 119 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
  • kenney v. davidson

    Vermont Superior Court · Feb 29, 2024

    Qualified Immunity Defendants seek dismissal on the grounds that they are protected by qualified immunity. … Thus they are not entitled to qualified immunity on a motion to dismiss.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Aviles Martinez v. Jimenez Monroig

    764 F. Supp. 240 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · May 28, 1991

    THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY DOCTRINE The doctrine of qualified immunity insulates government actors in their exercise of discretionary powers, from civil liability insofar as their conduct does not abridge clearly established … As the challenged patronage practices were not clearly established as violations of federal law when the conduct was allegedly committed, the doctrine of qualified immunity insulates the defendants from civil liability.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Neague ex rel. Neague v. Cynkar

    258 F.3d 504 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 25, 2001

    This court has held that the right to be free from excessive force is a clearly established Fourth Amendment right. Walton v. City of Southfield, 995 F.2d 1331, 1342 (6th Cir.1993). … It would not be necessary to make a qualified immunity analysis.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Jackson v. City of Bremerton

    268 F.3d 646 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 5, 2001

    The defense of qualified immunity, however, protects § 1983 defendants from liability for civil damages when performing discretionary functions, unless such conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory … In considering the merits of a qualified immunity defense in excessive force cases, courts previously considered whether the right was clearly established and, if so, whether, in light of such clearly established law, a reasonable

    Cited 135 timesPublished
  • Tveraas v. Coffey

    818 F. Supp. 75 · District Court, D. Vermont · Mar 5, 1993

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The doctrine of qualified immunity provides immunity from civil suits to government officials performing discretionary functions. Harlow v. … To establish entitlement to such protection, a defendant must show that he has not violated any clearly established constitutional or statutory rights of which a reasonable person would have known. Id.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Ward v. Noonan

    147 F. Supp. 3d 262 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 25, 2015

    “Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are immune from suit for damages where their conduct did not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Natasha Whitley v. John Hanna

    726 F.3d 631 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 8, 2013

    Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages liability when their actions could reasonably have been believed to be legal.” Morgan v. … Therefore, a plaintiff seeking to overcome qualified immunity must show: “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged

    Cited 590 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.