Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2016

10,000+ results

3.01s

  • Evans v. City of San Diego

    913 F. Supp. 2d 986 · District Court, S.D. California · Dec 19, 2012

    “Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … For example, “qualified immunity is available if a reasonable police officer could have believed that his ... conduct was lawful, in light of the clearly established law- and the information” possessed by the officer at the

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • ESTATE OF CASSARA BY CASSARA v. State of Ill.

    853 F. Supp. 273 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 19, 1994

    In order to penetrate defendants’ shield of qualified immunity as government officials performing discretionary functions, plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that the defendants’ conduct violated clearly established … established and the state officials’ actions clearly illegal.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Donald Xiques v. Charme Knight

    Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Aug 21, 2003

    We conclude that the defendant, a state prosecutor, is entitled to qualified immunity because her statements did not violate “clearly established” federal law, a requirement for recovering … Plaintiff argues that the issues in these two cases are not identical, because the Sixth Circuit opinion merely dealt with the issue of qualified immunity, and whether or not defendant had violated “clearly established law

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Huey B. Wright v. Harold Smith and Thomas A. Coughlin, III

    21 F.3d 496 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 6, 1994

    Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity shields state officials from liability where they did not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Russell II, 15 F.3d at 233 (official protected by qualified immunity where no Supreme Court or Second Circuit cases clearly establish procedures required to make independent assessment of witness’s credibility). 3 D.

    Abrogated on other grounds by Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472 (1995)Cited 1,199 timesPublished
  • Pullin v. City of Canton

    133 F. Supp. 2d 1045 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 9, 2001

    Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 (holding that qualified immunity shields state actors only “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … seizures is, as a general matter, clearly established.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Jackson v. Dackman Co.

    422 Md. 357 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 24, 2011

    Thus, the application of traditional or well-established immunities from suit has been held not to violate Article 19. See, e.g., Rios v. … Preliminarily, it should be noted that the immunity granted to defendants by §§ 6-828, 6-835, 6-836, and 6-836.1 of the Act is not, in any respect, a traditional or well-established *381 immunity from personal injury actions

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Metro. Dade County v. Chase Fed. Housing

    705 So. 2d 674 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 28, 1998

    The legislature established a fund and procedures for carrying out the necessary remedial measures. … The language of the immunity sections, see supra notes 2 and 3, is also comprehensive as to the preclusion of administrative and judicial action against those who qualify.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Morales v. Toledo

    638 F. Supp. 2d 168 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Apr 27, 2009

    Qualified Immunity 8 This Court will now discuss whether the doctrine of Qualified Immunity bars Plaintiffs claims against Colon. 9 Qualified immunity is a judge-made doctrine that “allows public officials to perform discretionary … taken violated that clearly established constitutional right.”

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Ortega v. City of Kansas City, Kansas

    659 F. Supp. 1201 · District Court, D. Kansas · Mar 18, 1987

    Qualified Immunity. Defendants argue that the court erred in holding that the individual defendants were not entitled to the defense of qualified immunity. … We recognize that in the ordinary case, an official’s violation of clearly established state statutes does not deprive an official of qualified immunity. See Davis v.

    Reversed on other grounds by Ortega v. City of Kansas City, 875 F.2d 1497 (1989)Cited 33 timesPublished
  • Randi Hyatt v. Callahan County

    843 F.3d 172 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 18, 2016

    “Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right.” Mace v. City of Palestine, 333 F.3d 621, 623 (5th Cir. 2003). … “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 conduct.’”

    Cited 148 timesPublished
  • Swofford v. Eslinger

    671 F. Supp. 2d 1289 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 30, 2009

    Swofford’s rights were not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … Swofford’s rights were clearly established. 471 U.S. 1 , 105 S.Ct. 1694 (1985). Mr.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Martinez-Baez v. Rey-Hernandez

    394 F. Supp. 2d 428 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jun 14, 2005

    Healthy , qualified immunity, and Eleventh Amendment immunity. We discuss each. i. Mt. … The procedures regarding qualified immunity allow for judicial review, via certiorari, on the qualified immunity issue. Id. at 207, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Murphy v. AA Mathews

    841 S.W.2d 671 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 18, 1992

    Although the language of Cutler did not explicitly limit the immunity to defamation cases, later English cases clearly establish its narrow applicability. … If one of those two requirements were lacking, the witness only enjoyed a qualified or conditional privilege, which could be vitiated by establishing malice. Id., 61 S.W. at 796 .

    Cited 54 timesPublished
  • Thomas v. Arnold

    696 F. Supp. 2d 882 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 18, 2010

    Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Crooks Johnson held that an officer’s statement that he observed the plaintiffs car cross the center line was sufficient to establish probable cause and qualified immunity.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Brooks v. Whiteford

    384 F. Supp. 3d 365 · District Court, W.D. New York · Jun 21, 2019

    The Supreme Court has recently explained that when a court is deciding whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, "the clearly established right must be defined with specificity," that the court should not "define … Thus, the fact that the right to be from excessive force, as a general principle, has long been clearly established is not dispositive of whether an individual defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Avery v. King

    110 F.3d 12 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 1, 1997

    We disagree. 9 "Government officials performing discretionary functions are afforded qualified immunity, shielding them from civil damages, as long as their conduct 'does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Therefore, Officer King was entitled to qualified immunity if " 'a reasonable officer could have believed [Avery's arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the [arresting] officers possessed

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • 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
  • Terrell v. Petrie

    763 F. Supp. 1342 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · May 17, 1991

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY This issue is the crux of Defendants’ motion to dismiss. The central question is whether Plaintiff can prove a violation of clearly established constitutional rights if allowed to go to trial. … If the Defendants acted reasonably, even if erroneously, they are entitled to qualified immunity. 1 Plaintiff claims Defendants violated three clearly established constitutional rights. They are considered in turn: 1.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • COM., TRANSP. CABINET, DEPT. HWYS v. Sexton

    256 S.W.3d 29 · Kentucky Supreme Court · Jun 19, 2008

    An agency’s “routine duties” will typically be established by statutes or regulations that very clearly and specifically set forth those actions that the agency must take. 5 For example, in Collins we found that mine site … Since this was clearly a discretionary act, the Commonwealth has not waived sovereign immunity for any alleged negligence in performing this act.

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Montgomery v. Conrad

    District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Oct 20, 2022

    When qualified immunity is raised in a motion to dismiss, the plaintiff’s allegations must “plausibly mak[e] out a claim that the defendant's conduct violated a constitutional right that was clearly established law at … established prong of the qualified immunity defense.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

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.