Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1861

10,000+ results

1.33s

  • Vose v. Kliment

    506 F.3d 565 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 26, 2007

    Kliment and Rouse moved to dismiss the case, asserting that they were entitled to qualified immunity against Vose’s claims because the applicable law on the rights of government employees to speak out was not clearly established … Secondly, they claim that the rights Vose alleges were violated were not clearly established at the time of the relevant events. To determine whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, we look to two issues.

    Cited 57 timesPublished
  • Sloman v. Tadlock

    21 F.3d 1462 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 14, 1994

    Qualified Immunity 9 Because many of the relevant facts were in dispute, the district court submitted the qualified immunity determination to the jury. 3 The jury rejected Hale's claim to qualified immunity. … The determination of qualified immunity 11 necessitates three inquiries: (1) the identification of the specific right allegedly violated; (2) the determination of whether that right was so "clearly established" as to alert

    Cited 71 timesPublished
  • In Re Petition of S. R. A. Inc.

    219 Minn. 493 · Supreme Court of Minnesota · Apr 13, 1945

    Clearly, the land-grant cases are not in point and establish no principle applicable to contracts for the outright sale of government property. … Ct. 293 , 66 L. ed. 573, supra), establish clearly how the state may protect the federal government’s paramount lien right and how in turn the federal government may protect itself.

    Cited 35 timesPublished
  • Simms v. Constantine

    113 Md. App. 291 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 29, 1997

    Ironically, it would mean that the police, who do not ordinarily hold law degrees, would be required to know the clearly established law, but prosecutors would not. 500 U.S. at 495 , 111 S.Ct. at 1944 (citations omitted). … Fitzgerald (1982), we "completely reformulated qualified immunity,” replacing the common-law subjective standard with an *314 objective standard that allows liability only where the official violates "clearly established

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Cockcroft v. Kirkland

    548 F. Supp. 2d 767 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 10, 2008

    Qualified Immunity. … The defense of qualified immunity protects “government officials ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Howard Lockridge v. Bd. of Trustees etc.

    315 F.3d 1005 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 14, 2003

    Jones’s request for qualified immunity. All of the defendants appeal. Mr. … Jones was not entitled to qualified immunity. On appeal, Dr. Jones contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity because Mr.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Fils v. City of Aventura

    768 F. Supp. 2d 1188 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 23, 2010

    If he did, qualified immunity applies. … Thus, absent clearly established precedent condemning a factually similar type of arrest, a police officer can generally still claim qualified immunity based on arguable probable cause.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Lee v. Arapahoe County

    197 F.3d 1291 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 1, 1999

    We affirm the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to Mr. … The final step in reviewing the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to Mr. Gibbs is to determine whether the right violated was clearly established at the time of Mr. Lee’s termination. Siegert v.

    Cited 30 timesPublished
  • Doninger v. Niehoff

    594 F. Supp. 2d 211 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Jan 15, 2009

    Doninger seeks to enforce was not clearly established at the time of the events in question, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on Ms. Doninger’s blog entry First Amendment claim. … qualified immunity.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Ross v. State of Ala.

    893 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 timesPublished
  • Losch v. Borough Of Parkesburg

    736 F.2d 903 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 14, 1984

    Kleindienst, 729 F.2d 267, 273 (3d Cir.1984). 26 Qualified immunity protects a defendant who failed to observe a right or a legal standard that was not clearly established when the defendant acted. … On the other hand, as the Harlow Court concluded, "[i]f the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail," unless the defendant "claims extraordinary circumstances and can prove that he neither

    Cited 115 timesPublished
  • Doe v. Marsh

    105 F.3d 106 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 22, 1997

    “Even where the plaintiffs federal rights and the scope of the official’s permissible conduct are clearly established, the qualified immunity defense protects a government actor if it was ‘objectively reasonable’ for him … ‘clearly established’ at the. time [the action] was taken.”)

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Joseph Walton, as Next Friend of Christopher Walton, a Minor v. Alma Alexander, Alma Alexander

    44 F.3d 1297 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 17, 1995

    City of Houston, 14 F.3d 1056, 1060 (5th Cir.1994) (finding summary judgment proper on qualified immunity grounds when no constitutional infringement established); Quives v. … immunity from this lawsuit if the constitutional allegations were not clearly established law at the *1306 time of the sexual abuse.

    Cited 134 timesPublished
  • Sears 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 timesPublished
  • Heap v. Carter

    112 F. Supp. 3d 402 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Jul 1, 2015

    Qualified immunity is available where a govérnment official performing discretionary functions “does not violate clearly established statutory-or constitutional rights of which a- reasonable person would have known.” … and if other appellate federal courts have split on the question of whether an asserted right exists, the right cannot be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Pearson v. City of Paris

    839 F. Supp. 645 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 2, 1993

    Qualified Immunity- Defendant Ford’s final argument is that he is entitled to qualified immunity as a “government official performing discretionary functions.” … Once a court determines as a matter of law that a legal standard governing the governmental action at issue was clearly established, there' is no qualified immunity. Id.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • D.H., Ex Rel. Dawson v. Clayton County School District

    830 F.3d 1306 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 29, 2016

    Clearly Established Law “A right may be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes in one of three ways: (1) case law with indistinguishable facts clearly establishing the constitutional right; (2) a broad … established constitutional right and is entitled to qualified immunity against D.H.’s § 1983 claim.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Wilson v. Meeks

    52 F.3d 1547 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 20, 1995

    However, qualified immunity is not a defense when officials’ actions violate clearly established constitutional rights. Quezada, 944 F.2d at 718 . … We conclude the facts here do not violate a clearly established duty under the constitution. The district court erred in refusing to grant summary judgment based on qualified immunity. VI.

    Cited 143 timesPublished
  • MONTEILH 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 timesPublished
  • Edwards v. Parish

    District Court, D. South Carolina · Jun 8, 2022

    Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982) (Qualified immunity protects officials who “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”). … Harris, 65 F.3d 347, 359–60 (4th Cir. 1995) (“If a plaintiff has alleged a clearly established right, summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds is improper as long as there remains any material factual dispute regarding

    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.