Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.36s
District Court, D. Hawaii · Mar 30, 2023
Police officers and other state actors may be entitled to qualified immunity. See District of Columbia v. Wesby, 138 S. … statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was “clearly established at the time.”).
Cited 0 timesUnknown893 F. Supp. 1545 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Jul 7, 1995
Under the qualified immunity defense, the defendants are immune from liability if [the plaintiff’s] complaint fails to state a violation of a "clearly established statutory or constitutional right[] of which a reasonable … The purpose of qualified immunity is to shield government officials performing discretionary functions from civil trials and liability if their conduct does not violate " 'clearly established statutory or constitutional rights
Cited 18 timesPublished290 Ark. 250 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 3, 1986
was not entitled to a qualified immunity. … Forsyth, supra, it is clearly stated that the qualified immunity of federal officials is an immunity from suit, citing Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982).
Cited 12 timesPublishedSears v. Bradley County Government
821 F. Supp. 2d 987 · District Court, E.D. Tennessee · Sep 26, 2011
Even if a government official deprives a plaintiff of a federal right, “qualified immunity will apply if an objective reasonable officer would not have understood, by referencing clearly established law, that his conduct … is entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 2 timesPublishedMONTEILH v. County of Los Angeles
820 F. Supp. 2d 1081 · District Court, C.D. California · Jul 12, 2011
Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields public officials sued in their individual capacity for monetary damages, unless their conduct violates “clearly established” law that a reasonable public officer would have known … “whether the right was clearly established.”
Cited 17 timesPublished60 F. Supp. 3d 584 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 20, 2014
doctrine of qualified immunity. … The qualified immunity analysis involves two steps: “(1) whether the plaintiff alleged sufficient facts to establish the violation of a constitutional right, and (2) whether the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time
Cited 14 timesPublished79 F.3d 372 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Mar 19, 1996
but also of federal law that was "clearly established" at the time the alleged conduct occurred. … established, the district court erred in declining to afford Green and Krautheim qualified immunity from the surviving constitutional tort claims against them.
Cited 60 timesPublished488 F. Supp. 2d 1048 · District Court, S.D. California · Mar 16, 2007
“Clearly Established” Law The second prong of Saucier asks “whether the right was clearly established.” Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . … Because Plaintiff has not shown the violation of a clearly established right under RLUIPA, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from Plaintiffs claims for damages.
Cited 5 timesPublishedWagner v. Genesee County Board of Commissioners
607 F. Supp. 1158 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Apr 23, 1985
However, the Supreme Court has concluded that an immunity that was “well established at common law at the time § 1983 was enacted and ... … here just because these officers’ immunity is absolute rather than qualified.
Cited 4 timesPublished107 F. Supp. 2d 748 · District Court, N.D. Texas · May 31, 2000
Murray contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity because his actions did not violate clearly established federal law. … clearly established in June 1996.
Cited 1 timesPublishedNassau County Department of Social Services v. R.B.
23 Misc. 3d 270 · New York City Family Court · Dec 18, 2008
To qualify for an exemption respondent must first demonstrate that she holds a religious belief that is contrary to immunization. … The testimony of the DSS caseworker clearly established that the three children have never been immunized.
Cited 3 timesPublished775 F. Supp. 2d 23 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2011
Qualified Immunity As noted previously in this Memorandum Opinion, the doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established … Therefore, because the plaintiff alleges in his Complaint the violation of a clearly established constitutional right, defendant Mulhollan’s motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds must be denied. 2.
Cited 9 timesPublished445 F.3d 1157 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 20, 2006
It denied qualified immunity to Brooks and Hanson on the basis of Giles v. … If so, “the next, sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established.” Id.
Cited 50 timesPublishedMary D. Branch v. Officer Timothy Gorman
742 F.3d 1069 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 12, 2014
Qualified immunity is available to government officials who prove their conduct did "not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Officer Garbisch is entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 15 timesPublished935 F. Supp. 2d 575 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 29, 2013
Qualified Immunity 1. Applicable Law Defendants claim they are entitled to qualified immunity as to Plaintiffs false arrest and malicious prosecution claims. … Sergeant Reed is Entitled to Qualified Immunity The Court concludes Sgt.
Cited 23 timesPublished681 F. Supp. 840 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Mar 15, 1988
The Harlow decision defined the limits of qualified immunity in objective terms and instructed courts to consider only whether the official’s conduct in question violated clearly established law. … of qualified immunity. 5 B.
Cited 10 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 19, 2016
The defendants moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability unless his conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedAl 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 timesPublished51 F.3d 901 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 30, 1995
[T]he plaintiff must do more than identify in the abstract a clearly established right and allege that the defendant has violated it. … , or establish that defendants’ actions were clearly prohibited at the time they were taken. 5 See id.
Superseded by statute, as recognized in Knox v. BlandCited 47 timesPublished847 F.2d 66 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 17, 1988
In furtherance of these policies, the discriminant for qualified immunity focuses on the objective legal reasonableness of an official's acts under law which has been clearly established at the time he acts. … the violation of clear law needed to supply the malice element of the constitutional tort. 11 A government official will be denied qualified immunity for having violated a clearly established right when "in the light of
Abrogated on other grounds by Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266 (1994)Cited 34 timesPublished
Ask Donna