Case law

Peter Wenk v. Edward O'Reilly

783 F.3d 585 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 15, 2015

of qualified immunity, and (2) the issue appealed concerns not which facts the parties might be able to prove, but whether certain alleged facts reflect a violation of clearly established law.” … Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Burnham v. West

681 F. Supp. 1169 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Jan 29, 1988

Here the Court, upon reconsideration, intentionally sweeps more broadly than in its earlier ruling on whether defendants violated "clearly established" constitutional rights. … If there are means to show that rights are clearly established other than by controlling precedent as required by Wallace v.

Galen v. County of Los Angeles

322 F. Supp. 2d 1045 · District Court, C.D. California · Jan 9, 2004

established at the time the search took place, the officers were entitled to the defense of qualified immunity. … “[A] plaintiff can only survive summary judgment on a defense claim of qualified immunity if the plaintiff can both establish a substantial showing of deliberate falsehood or reckless disregard and establish that, without

Walter v. County of San Diego

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 30, 2020

A public official is entitled to qualified immunity “unless the official’s 12 conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. [Citation omitted.]” Id. at 232. 13 In Saucier v. … Because the law was clearly 7 established, Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. 8 9 D.

Dobson v. McClennen

238 Ariz. 389 · Arizona Supreme Court · Nov 20, 2015

A. ¶ 8 The AMMA broadly immunizes registered qualifying patients for their medical use of marijuana, providing: A registered qualifying patient ... is not subject to arrest, prosecution or penalty in any manner, or denial … When read together, the statutory provisions suggest that the AMMA gives qualifying patients a limited defense rather than a general immunity in (A)(3) prosecutions. ¶ 18 We reject, however, Petitioners’ argument that qualifying

Donahoe v. Arpaio

869 F. Supp. 2d 1020 · District Court, D. Arizona · Apr 9, 2012

. § 1983 , 11 qualified immunity protects a government official from suit where that official’s conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … of free speech rights [is] violative” of clearly established law).

Ruffino v. Sheahan

61 F. Supp. 2d 764 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 10, 1999

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in their individual capacities if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … A plaintiff must show that a constitutional violation occurred and that the applicable constitutional standards were clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. Erwin v.

Flynn v. City of Santa Clara

388 F. Supp. 3d 1158 · District Court, N.D. California · May 22, 2019

However, viewpoint discrimination is barred under clearly established First Amendment law. … Alcarez but, even if not, at the very least, qualified immunity protects the individual officers as there was no clearly established law holding that defense of others is a legal defense to a § 148(a)(1) violation. III.

Fortunati v. Campagne

681 F. Supp. 2d 528 · District Court, D. Vermont · Dec 29, 2009

Under qualified immunity doctrine, government actors are not liable for damages unless they “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Judge Sessions recently laid out the second step as follows: The second step of the qualified immunity analysis asks whether the officials’ actions violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional lights of which

Yoak v. Marshall University Board of Governors

223 W. Va. 55 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 9, 2008

The appellees contend that the circuit court properly found that qualified immunity is applicable to the instant ease. … Therefore, unless there is a bona fide dispute as to the foundational or historical facts that underlie the immunity determination, the ultimate questions of statutory or qualified immunity are ripe for summary disposition

Solis-Alarcon v. United States

432 F. Supp. 2d 236 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · May 17, 2006

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability for money damages when their conduct does not violate “clearly established” statutory authority or con *246 stitutional … understand that the challenged conduct violated the clearly established right at issue.

McIntyre v. United States

336 F. Supp. 2d 87 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 2004

Qualified Immunity Under the qualified immunity doctrine, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … The defense of qualified immunity applies unless the law is clearly established either by materially similar precedent or by general legal principles that apply with obvious clarity to the facts of the case. Hope v.

Black v. City of Mobile

963 F. Supp. 2d 1288 · District Court, S.D. Alabama · Aug 5, 2013

Chief Williams is also entitled to qualified immunity under the same burden-shifting standard as used in evaluating Martin’s claim for qualified immunity. … Chief Williams is entitled to qualified immunity at this stage in the proceedings unless Black demonstrates a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

Gibson v. Rich

44 F.3d 274 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 30, 1995

Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … In suits alleging illegal arrest, the qualified immunity determination turns on whether a reasonable officer could have believed the arrest to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the officer

Green River District Health Deparment v. Wigginton

764 S.W.2d 475 · Kentucky Supreme Court · Jan 19, 1989

Our Court held that the purchase of indemnifying insurance by the governmental entity, per se, did not establish a right to sue the governmental entity which was otherwise immune. … We held that “the statute clearly contemplates a limited waiver of governmental immunity to the extent of the insurance coverage.” Id. at 40 .

Roman v. Appleby

558 F. Supp. 449 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 22, 1983

Immunity Defendants’ defense of qualified or “good faith” immunity is much more persuasive. The immunity concept is based upon the need to ensure principled and conscientious governmental decision-making. Crowder v. … established law, thereby entitling her to the defense of qualified immunity, I also find that defense of immunity is supported by the provisions of the Child Protective Services Law (CPSL) of 1975, 11 P.S. § 2201, et seq

Riley v. City of Montgomery, AL

104 F.3d 1247 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 30, 1997

Accordingly, Wooten is entitled to no immunity for such claims. … The Grant of Summary Judgment to City Defendants Though the district court's opinion largely speaks in terms of qualified immunity, the district court did conclude, in its summary judgment order, that no constitutional

Foster v. Missouri Department of Health & Senior Services

736 F.3d 759 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 13, 2013

was clearly established at the time of the defendant's alleged misconduct." … We conclude that placing Essie Foster on the disqualification list in these circumstances was not a deprivation of the Fosters' clearly established due process rights and that Hansen and Watkins are thus entitled to qualified

Sampson v. City of Schenectady

160 F. Supp. 2d 336 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 16, 2001

Qualified Immunity 1. … General Standard for Qualified Immunity The affirmative defense of qualified immunity “shields public officials from liability for their discretionary acts that do ‘not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Freeman v. Fallin

310 F. Supp. 2d 11 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 26, 2004

Qualified immunity “shield[s 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.” … establish that the urinalysis testing at issue here qualifies as a search.