Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1980

10,000+ results

3.51s

  • GJR Investments, Inc. v. County of Escambia

    132 F.3d 1359 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 5, 1998

    Under the qualified immunity doctrine, government officials performing discretionary functions8 are immune not just from liability, but from suit, unless the conduct which is the basis for suit violates "clearly established … This is particularly true in cases involving qualified immunity, where we must determine whether a defendant's actions violate a clearly established right.

    Overruled in part, on other grounds by Randall v. Scott, 610 F.3d 701 (2010)Cited 1,184 timesPublished
  • Baylor Scott & White v. Peyton

    549 S.W.3d 242 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 19, 2018

    We therefore focus our analysis on whether BHCS qualifies for immunity under section 285.072. See itation index="23" url="https://cite. case.law/citations/? … BHCS Does Not Qualify for Immunity under Section 285.072 As set forth above, a hospital district management company is entitled to governmental immunity under the TTCA "in its management or operation of a hospital under a

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Thomas v. City of Troy

    293 F. Supp. 3d 282 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 22, 2018

    Qualified Immunity "Once qualified immunity is pleaded, plaintiff's complaint will be dismissed unless defendant's alleged conduct, when committed, violated 'clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Sikirica is not entitled to qualified immunity at this time. See Wise v.

    Cited 31 timesPublished
  • GUILLEMARD GINORIO v. Contreras

    409 F. Supp. 2d 101 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jan 10, 2006

    Qualified Immunity In their motion, the defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified *111 immunity in relation to plaintiffs’ due process claims. … immunity, the Court must consider “(1) whether plaintiffs allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation; (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation; and (3) whether a

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Ottman v. City of Independence

    341 F.3d 751 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 3, 2003

    Government officials who perform discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity unless their alleged conduct violated clearly established federal constitutional or statutory rights of which a reasonable person … Therefore, Hahl is entitled to qualified immunity. C.

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • Kenneth W. Martin v. John P. Malhoyt, John Doe(s) Shirley Ann Stevens v. David H. Stover, John Doe

    830 F.2d 237 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 24, 1987

    The district court recited the Harlow standard: qualified immunity shields government officials as long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.

    Cited 252 timesPublished
  • Wilson v. Lawrence County

    260 F.3d 946 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 15, 2001

    Qualified Immunity 13 "[G]overnment officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 638 (1987). 14 In determining if appellants are entitled to qualified immunity we must ask whether Wilson states a violation of a constitutional right, and whether that right was clearly established

    Cited 57 timesPublished
  • Karen Kelly Austin, Individually and as Natural Tutrix of Minors, Renee Chevelle Henry and Raenell Lynn Henry v. Ronald Borel and Janenne Trahan

    830 F.2d 1356 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 21, 1987

    Qualified immunity shields only that conduct not violative of clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. 14 Absolute immunity, in contrast, precludes any action for damages, so … established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.

    Cited 49 timesPublished
  • Joseph v. Patterson

    795 F.2d 549 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 2, 1986

    If the law which the defendant’s conduct is alleged to have violated is clearly established, then the qualified immunity defense must fail and discovery proceed. … If the law is not clearly established, the defendant is immune and summary judgment is proper. Windsor, 719 F.2d at 165 .

    Abrogated on other grounds by Kalina v. Fletcher, 522 U.S. 118 (1997)Cited 107 timesPublished
  • FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUN. v. Romer

    921 P.2d 84 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Jun 27, 1996

    clearly established statutory or *90 constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … What is "clearly established law" is a question of law, and a court engaging in review of a qualified immunity determination should therefore use "its full knowledge of its own [and other relevant] precedents."

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Trammell v. Wright

    489 S.W.3d 636 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 7, 2016

    For example, “qualified immunity” is defined as the “[a]ffirmative defense which shields public officials performing discretionary functions from civil damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … A motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity is precluded only when the plaintiff has asserted a constitutional violation, demonstrated that the constitutional right is clearly established, and raised a genuine

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Kanae v. Hodson

    294 F. Supp. 2d 1179 · District Court, D. Hawaii · Nov 5, 2003

    Hodson’s Qualified Immunity Defense. Hodson argues that he has qualified immunity with respect to Kanae’s claims. … Qualified immunity bars claims against government officials in their individual capacities if their conduct did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • McCollum v. Garrett

    880 S.W.2d 530 · Kentucky Supreme Court · Sep 1, 1994

    During the time in which McCollum essentially acted as an investigator, the protection available to him was qualified immunity. … . -, 113 S.Ct. 2606 , 125 L.Ed.2d 209 (1993), as follows: ... government officials are not subject to damages liability for the performance of their discretionary functions when "their conduct does not violate clearly established

    Cited 38 timesPublished
  • Ronda Marsh v. Phelps County

    902 F.3d 745 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 15, 2018

    Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages in their individual capacities if their conduct did not violate "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the plaintiff has asserted a violation of a constitutional right; (2) the alleged right is clearly established; and (3) there exists a genuine issue of material

    Cited 492 timesPublished
  • Ober v. Evanko

    80 F. App'x 196 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 21, 2003

    The District Court denied Appellants’ motion, finding that Appellants violated Ober’s clearly established First Amendment rights and, thus, were not entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability from civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Carter v. Butts County

    110 F. Supp. 3d 1325 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Jun 2, 2015

    “Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from suits in their individual capacities unless their conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … In wrongful arrest cases, the Eleventh Circuit has “defined the ‘clearly-established’ prong as an ‘arguable probable cause’ inquiry.” Moran v.

    Reversed on other grounds by David Carter v. Timothy Filbeck, 821 F.3d 1310 (2016)Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Williams v. Kaufman County

    352 F.3d 994 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 8, 2003

    Qualified Immunity Standard To prevail in a § 1983 suit, a plaintiff must overcome an officer’s defense of qualified immunity. Last term, in Hope v. … Whether the law was “clearly established” Although we hold today that the prolonged detention of plaintiffs was unlawful, we nonetheless agree with the district court that qualified immunity shields

    Cited 97 timesPublished
  • Boswell v. County of Sherburne

    849 F.2d 1117 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 21, 1988

    were clearly established at the time of the challenged actions * * Mitchell v. … This court has in the past taken a broad view of what constitutes “clearly established law” for the purposes of a qualified immunity inquiry, requiring some but not precise factual correspondence with precedents and demanding

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Cole v. Barnes

    128 F. Supp. 3d 1002 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Sep 4, 2015

    Qualified Immunity Defendants Barnes and George contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity with respect to Plaintiffs First and Fourth Amendment claims because the Sheriffs Department had probable cause, in the … Qualified immunity “protects government officials performing discretionary functions unless their conduct violates a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable person in the official’s position

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Eastwood v. Department of Corrections of Oklahoma

    846 F.2d 627 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 12, 1988

    Lovelace in his individual capacity survives the qualified immunity defense because plaintiff has established that Mr. Lovelace knew or should have known about plaintiff’s clearly established right of privacy. … To determine the applicability of a qualified immunity defense, an appellate court must examine if the official conduct at issue “violatefd] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

    Cited 6 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.