Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

10,000+ results

1.65s

  • Iacobucci v. Town of Pembroke

    193 F.3d 14 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Oct 4, 1999

    "Hence, state officials exercising discretionary authority are entitled to qualified immunity insofar as their conduct does not transgress clearly established constitutional or federal statutory rights of which a reasonably … Hence, Boulter was not entitled to qualified immunity. III.

    Cited 147 timesPublished
  • Greenwood v. of New York

    163 F.3d 119 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 11, 1998

    . § 1983 ; it did so on the ground that the officials had qualified immunity. 1 We disagree with the court's conclusion that Greenwood's property right in his clinical staff privileges was not clearly established and that … "Even defendants who violate [clearly established] constitutional rights enjoy a qualified immunity that protects them from liability for damages unless it is further demonstrated that their conduct was unreasonable under

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Vann v. City of Southaven, Mississippi

    876 F.3d 133 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 22, 2017

    “A qualified immunity defense alters the usual summary judgment burden of proof. … “The . dispositive question is ‘whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.’ ” Mullenix v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Franklin Building Corp. v. City of Ocean City

    946 F. Supp. 1161 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 18, 1996

    qualified immunity. … “clearly established”_ In instances of violations which are not clearly established, a showing of improper motive will not defeat a qualified immunity claim. Grant, 98 F.3d at 125 n. 6. This is one such case.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Fitzpatrick v. City of Dearborn Heights

    105 F. App'x 733 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 15, 2004

    STANDARD OF REVIEW We review de novo a district court’s denial of qualified immunity. Dickerson v. McClellan, 101 F.3d 1151 , 1157 (6th Cir. 1996). DISCUSSION A qualified immunity analysis requires a two-step process. … Simakas are not entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Anderson v. Larson

    327 F.3d 762 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 30, 2003

    IV 20 Qualified immunity shields government officials from federal suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known. Harlow v. … The inquiry "focuses on the objective legal reasonableness of the official's acts," and the qualified immunity defense fails if the official violates a clearly established right because "a reasonably competent public official

    Cited 41 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
  • Tucker v. Cty Richmond, KY

    388 F.3d 216 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 28, 2004

    The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials who perform discretionary functions from civil liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Assuming that “a violation could be made out on a favorable view of the parties’ submissions, the next, sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Ruffino v. Sheahan

    61 F. Supp. 2d 764 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 10, 1999

    The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in their individual capacities if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … A plaintiff must show that a constitutional violation occurred and that the applicable constitutional standards were clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. Erwin v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Robinson v. Cook

    863 F. Supp. 2d 49 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 21, 2012

    “[T]he second, ‘clearly established,’ step of the qualified immunity analysis ... in turn, has two aspects.” Maldonado v. Fontanes, 568 F.3d 263, 269 (1st Cir.2009). … Whether the Constitutional Right was Clearly Established The defendants argue that even if Mario’s constitutional rights were violated, they are entitled to qualified immunity because that right was not clearly established

    Cited 57 timesPublished
  • Roy George, Shirley George and Sherrod Fitts v. City of St. Louis, Robert Scheetz, Albert Upchurch and Brian Gilmore

    26 F.3d 55 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 6, 1994

    In other words, to decide whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, “a court must determine whether the official’s action was objectively legally reasonable in light of the legal rules that were clearly established … to qualified immunity and the district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the Defendants.

    Cited 29 timesPublished
  • Amy Sanders v. Lamar Jones

    845 F.3d 721 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 9, 2017

    Jones is entitled to qualified immunity because Sanders cannot establish the violation of a constitutional right. … immunity grounds); see generally Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731, 735 (2011) (holding that a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff establishes the violation of a clearly established constitutional

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • Acevedo-Garcia v. Vera Monroig

    30 F. Supp. 2d 141 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Nov 23, 1998

    Therefore, Plaintiffs assert that Defendants are not immune from liability since their unconstitutional actions occurred when the law regarding patronage dismissals was “clearly established” in this Circuit. … In addition, the individual defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity as the right to be free from political discrimination and actual or constructive patronage dismissals was clearly established in the First Circuit

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Johnson v. City of Chester

    10 F. Supp. 2d 482 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 31, 1998

    Qualified and Legislative Immunity Defendants next seek qualified immunity for Police Commissioner Butler, and both legislative and qualified immunity for Mayor Wilson, for their alleged actions. … Such rights are among the most well-known and clearly-established in our Constitution.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Peterson v. Heymes

    277 F. Supp. 3d 913 · District Court, W.D. Michigan · Sep 29, 2017

    Qualified Immunity MSP Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Once the qualified immunity defense is raised, the plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating both that the challenged conduct violates a constitutional or statutory right and that the right was so clearly established at

    Cited 1 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
  • Tucker v. Faith Bible Chapel Int'l.

    36 F.4th 1021 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 7, 2022

    favor in order to answer the legal question of whether the plaintiff has asserted a clearly established constitutional violation. … Consider qualified immunity, which shields government officials from suits for damages unless the official violates a clearly established federal constitutional or statutory right.

    Cited 63 timesPublished
  • Eugene De Boise, Sr. v. St. Louis County, Missouri

    760 F.3d 892 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 28, 2014

    Louis County, Missouri. 1 Officers Lively and Percich moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity, and St. … “Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known

    Cited 42 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 &#167 1983 defendants from liability for civil damages when performing discretionary functions, unless such conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 640 (1987). 12 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

    Cited 171 timesPublished
  • Connor v. Halifax Hospital Medical Center

    135 F. Supp. 2d 1198 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 5, 2001

    This is particularly true in cases involving qualified immunity, where the court must determine whether a defendant’s actions violated a clearly established right. GJR Investments, 132 F.3d at 1367 . … rules that were “clearly established” at the *1217 time it was taken.

    Cited 5 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.