Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1925

10,000+ results

4.28s

  • DeRosa v. Bell

    24 F. Supp. 2d 252 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Aug 31, 1998

    A party is entitled to summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds if the court finds that the rights asserted by the plaintiff were not clearly established or: no reasonable jury, looking at the evidence in the light … While the right to due process is clearly established under the fourteenth amendment, the issue of qualified immunity cannot be resolved at such a high level of generality. See Anderson v.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Asten v. City of Boulder

    652 F. Supp. 2d 1188 · District Court, D. Colorado · Aug 26, 2009

    Qualified Immunity Officers Compton and Frenzen assert a qualified immunity defense to Ms. Asten’s claims against them individually. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Daniel Irish v. Keith McNamara

    108 F.4th 715 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 18, 2024

    Deputy McNamara moved to dismiss the complaint based on qualified immunity. … During argument on the motion, the district court observed that this was a “highly unfortunate accident,” but it nevertheless denied qualified immunity, reasoning that it was clearly established that a seizure occurred within

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Susan Fisler Silberstein v. City of Dayton

    440 F.3d 306 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 3, 2006

    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 … Whether Silberstein’s First Amendment rights were clearly established Having found that no First Amendment violation occurred, we need not address the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis.

    Cited 277 timesPublished
  • Henry S. Kijonka v. Michael Seitzinger

    363 F.3d 645 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 14, 2004

    We cannot find a reported Illinois case that found the elements of assault satisfied in any case remotely like this one, and this dooms Rietz’s defense of qualified immunity. … Kirksey, 885 F.2d 476, 478 (8th Cir.1989), but it goes far to establish qualified immunity.

    Cited 73 timesPublished
  • Bond v. Nikki

    District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Dec 6, 2021

    court next must decide whether the plaintiff has raised claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Counseling Ctr., 987 F.2d 397, 408-09 (7th Cir. 1993) (discussing relevant case law in context of assessing whether law was clearly established for qualified-immunity purposes)).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Rivera v. Senkowski

    62 F.3d 80 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 8, 1995

    Finally, the district court rejected defendants' defense of qualified immunity as to the retaliation claim since (1) the constitutional right against retaliation had been clearly established by 1990 and (2) defendants' acts … Appellate Jurisdiction 12 The affirmative defense of qualified immunity "shields public officials from liability for their discretionary acts that do 'not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Heflin v. Stewart County

    958 F.2d 709 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 9, 1992

    The defendants now argue that the court should have submitted their qualified immunity defense to the jury. That is clearly not the law. We stated in Poe v. … Haydon, 853 F.2d 418, 424 (6th Cir.1988), that “[resolution of qualified immunity is purely a question of law.”

    Cited 42 timesPublished
  • Brayshaw v. Gelber

    232 N.J. Super. 99 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 6, 1989

    We acknowledged that this qualified immunity was subject to N.J.S.A. 59:3-14a as are all Tort Claims Act immunities. … therefore, she was entitled to a qualified immunity under N.J.S.A. 59:3-3.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Mangieri v. Clifton

    29 F.3d 1012 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 24, 1994

    A police officer is entitled to claim the cloak of qualified immunity "unless it is shown that, at the time of the incident, he violated a clearly established constitutional right." Spann v. … The right to be free from arrest without probable cause is a clearly established constitutional right. See Beck v.

    Cited 205 timesPublished
  • Cugini v. City of New York, Palazzola

    941 F.3d 604 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 25, 2019

    It granted the defendantsʹ motion for summary judgment, however, on the ground that Palazzola was entitled to qualified immunity because his behavior did not constitute a violation of a clearly established constitutional … However, because at the time of the plaintiffʹs arrest Palazzolaʹs actions did not violate clearly established constitutional law, the district court correctly concluded that his actions were protected by qualified immunity

    Cited 112 timesPublished
  • Ladd v. Thibault

    402 F. App'x 618 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 6, 2010

    DePrisco, 432 F.3d 98, 107 (2d Cir. 2005). 16 “Government actors have qualified immunity to § 1983 claims 17 ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly 18 established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Thus, “[a] qualified immunity defense is 23 established if (a) the defendant’s action did not violate 24 clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively 25 reasonable for the defendant to believe that his action

    Cited 2 timesUnpublished
  • Eddie O. Buckley, Jr. v. Russell Rogerson, Warden Imcc Paul W. Loeffelholz, M.D.

    133 F.3d 1125 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 21, 1998

    DISCUSSION Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, a government official is immune from suit unless the conduct complained of violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … As we have noted in previous cases, this court has taken a “broad view” of what constitutes clearly established law for purposes of qualified immunity. Id. at 677.

    Cited 83 timesPublished
  • Michael L. Davis v. John Zirkelbach

    149 F.3d 614 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 9, 1998

    Ordinarily, because Lenn is entitled to qualified immunity from a suit based on the legal advice he gave to the police officers, we would ask whether his actions violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional … In Harlow , the Supreme Court explained its scope as follows: *620 If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing

    Cited 74 timesPublished
  • Smith v. Ciesielski

    975 F. Supp. 2d 930 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 30, 2013

    In particular, the statute provides officials qualified immunity for “[t]he performance of a discretionary function.” Ind.Code § 34-13-3-3(7). … As with common law qualified immunity under Section 1983, an official’s conduct does not merit exemption from suit if it “violate[s] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person should

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Tortu v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

    556 F.3d 1075 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 3, 2009

    ’ qualified immunity claims. … The determination of qualified immunity at step two is strictly a legal question of whether, even though the facts alleged by the plaintiff make out a constitutional violation, that constitutional right was not clearly established

    Cited 132 timesPublished
  • Colston v. Barnhart

    130 F.3d 96 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 29, 1998

    Disputes over the application of the clearly-established-law prong of the qualified-immunity inquiry are separable from the merits of a controversy because “‘[a]n appellate court reviewing the denial of the defendant … The semantic switch from discussing the typical qualified-immunity issue of “clearly established law” to a hypothetical (in Behrens) issue of “objective legal reasonableness” creates many of the problems that are now plaguing

    Cited 36 timesPublished
  • Askari Abdullah Muhammad, 017434 v. Louie L. Wainwright, Richard Dugger, Clayton C. Strickland, David Watson, Thomas L. Barton, R.R. Music

    839 F.2d 1422 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 28, 1987

    Muhammad further argues that because this area of the law was clearly established, defendants should not be permitted to avail themselves of qualified immunity. … Broadly defining “clearly established law” as Muhammad suggests significantly undermines part of the rationale for the qualified immunity defense.

    Cited 66 timesPublished
  • Theron v. Board of County Commissioners

    District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Sep 26, 2024

    “Qualified immunity protects officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Bednar, 407 F.3d 1081, 1087 (10th Cir. 2005) (“[The defendant] violated clearly established law, and thus is not entitled to qualified immunity, if he terminated [the plaintiff] for exercising her free speech rights.”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Ashcroft v. al-Kidd

    563 U.S. 731 · Supreme Court of the United States · May 31, 2011

    (a) Qualified immunity shields a government official from money damages unless (1) the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that right was “clearly established” at the time of the challenged conduct … Ashcroft did not violate clearly established law and thus is enti tled to qualified immunity.

    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.