Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

10,000+ results

1.62s

  • Tsotesi v. Board of Education of the City School District

    258 F. Supp. 2d 336 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 23, 2003

    of Board policies violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.” 12 *339 Conclusion The motion of the BOE Defendants for judgment on the pleadings dismissing the complaint as to them is granted insofar … Vermont Dep’t of Educ., 313 F.3d 768 , 793 (2d Cir.2002) (holding that “a ruling on the availability of a qualified immunity defense would be premature” because “[t]he qualified immunity issue in this case turns on factual

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Oliver v. Arnold

    3 F.4th 152 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 29, 2021

    right was clearly established at the time of their conduct. … Qualified immunity yields only where an official violates “clearly established law,” meaning binding authority “that defines the contours of the right in question with a high degree of particularity.” Morgan v.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Idoux v. Lamar University System

    828 F. Supp. 1252 · District Court, E.D. Texas · Jul 13, 1993

    Qualified Immunity The question of whether qualified immunity will protect an official is one of law for the Court to decide. Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806, 2815-2816 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985). … To be entitled to qualified immunity, a governmental official must have been performing discretionary functions, and his conduct must not have violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • 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
  • 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
  • Perkins v. Click

    148 F. Supp. 2d 1177 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Jun 13, 2001

    Alternatively, Defendants maintain they are entitled to qualified immunity because there was no clearly established law indicating their actions violated Plaintiffs constitutional rights. … has long been clearly established.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Karla Kaye Kuehl v. Stephen P. Burtis Terry Satterlee Other John Doe City of Sioux Falls Ezekial James McBeth

    173 F.3d 646 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 29, 1999

    We reject this challenge, but we must first establish our jurisdiction to hear the case. When a district court’s denial of a claim of qualified immunity turns upon an issue of law, it is an appealable “final decision.” … In determining whether the district court should have granted summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity, we must consider whether Kuehl has alleged a violation of a clearly-established constitutional right and whether

    Cited 192 timesPublished
  • Angel Mendez v. County of Los Angeles

    Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 2, 2016

    The court also held that its conclusions in each respect were supported by clearly established law and that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity. … In the absence of clearly established law that squarely governs the situation here, qualified immunity is appropriate on the knock-and-announce claim. Id. at 309.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Harvey A. Thompson v. City of Starkville, Mississippi, David Lindley, Larry Sisk, and Jimmy Raines, Individually and in Their Official Capacities

    901 F.2d 456 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 3, 1990

    Forsyth, it has been established that an appeal may be taken of a finding against qualified immunity where the issue involved is the purely legal one of “whether the legal norms allegedly violated by the defendant were clearly … Perez, 751 F.2d 1472 , 1477 n. 13 (5th Cir.1985) (“Under the qualified immunity standard, government officials are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

    Cited 138 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
  • Fares v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service

    29 F. Supp. 2d 259 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Oct 27, 1998

    Qualified Immunity Individual Defendants argue that, at the very least, they are all shielded from Plaintiffs’ Bivens claims by qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity holds that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Hoffman v. Lehman

    926 F. Supp. 510 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 23, 1996

    violation of clearly established law. … Defendants argue that even if Plaintiffs have stated a substantive due process claim based upon clearly established law, the evidence so far developed entitles them to summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity

    Cited 1 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
  • Green v. Security Assurance Management

    District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 11, 2024

    Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … The “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity “means that, at the time of the officer’s conduct, the law was ‘sufficiently clear’ that every ‘reasonable official would understand that what he is doing’ is unlawful

    Cited 0 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
  • 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
  • Walker v. Tyler County Commission

    886 F. Supp. 540 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · May 22, 1995

    An executive official is entitled to qualified immunity where an objective observer could find that the officer reasonably believed that his conduct did not violate clearly established constitutional rights. See e.g. … any clearly established constitutional rights of the plaintiff.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Terrell v. Harris County

    115 F.4th 356 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 9, 2024

    The district court granted qualified immunity to the deputy who was not accused of sexual assault. On appeal, Terrell fails to establish that the deputy violated a clearly established constitutional right. … In sum, Terrell failed to show a clearly established violation of her rights. The district court correctly granted qualified immunity to Cannon. b.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Walker ex rel. T.W. v. City of New York

    63 F. Supp. 3d 301 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 5, 2014

    Defendants Robinson and White Are Entitled to Qualified Immunity 1) Caseworker Qualified Immunity “Immunity ordinarily should be decided by the court long before trial.” Hunter v. … Individual government actors performing discretionary tasks are entitled to qualified immunity if: “(a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Grisham v. Valenciano

    93 F.4th 903 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 26, 2024

    However, “[a] qualified immunity defense alters the usual summary judgment burden of proof” because, to overcome qualified immunity, Plaintiffs “must rebut the defense by establishing a genuine [dispute of material fact] … The officers are entitled to qualified immunity because neither Everard nor Grisham can point to any clearly established law that such force was unreasonably excessive under the circumstances.

    Cited 18 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.