Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1851

10,000+ results

2.96s

  • Nieto v. San Perlita Independent School District

    894 F.2d 174 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 16, 1990

    the plaintiff’s clearly established right to protected speech. … Consequently, the defendants did not violate a clearly established constitutional right secured to Nieto. They are therefore entitled to qualified immunity and dismissal from this suit.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • 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.

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • 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.

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • 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.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Nicholas v. Attorney General

    584 Utah Adv. Rep. 13 · Utah Supreme Court · Aug 14, 2007

    Because the provision is not clearly directed at remedying past gender discrimination, Hibbs does not apply. … Because neither the death of a daughter-in-law nor the assistance of a healthy adult child qualifies for family-care leave, Ms. Nicholas could only qualify for leave under the self-care provision of the FMLA. .

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • 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.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • 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.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Linda Mays v. H.G. Rhodes

    255 F.3d 644 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 29, 2001

    Qualified immunity generally shields public officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability if "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Second, the right allegedly violated must be clearly established. Id.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 87 timesPublished
  • 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 .

    Overruled on other grounds by Withers v. University of Kentucky, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 29 (1997)Cited 27 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 62 timesPublished
  • Timothy Daryl Atkins v. John Gibson Lanning, Kenneth D. Fouts and Randall Craig Ruark

    556 F.2d 485 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 8, 1977

    Hence the arresting officer is entitled to the qualified immunity defense of a good faith belief that his behavior was proper. See Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232 , 94 S.Ct. 1683 , 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974); Pierson v. … But the alternative of qualifying a prosecutor’s immunity would disserve the broader public interest.

    Cited 93 timesPublished
  • 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.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Fields v. Blake

    349 F. Supp. 2d 910 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 20, 2004

    Under the qualified immunity doctrine, “[o]fficials exercising discretionary powers are ‘shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Once a plaintiff has *922 established a constitutional violation, courts evaluating a qualified immunity claim must decide whether the constitutional right was clearly established. Id.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Chevallier v. Hand

    884 F. Supp. 2d 807 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 6, 2012

    Because an “in the presence” requirement for a warrantless police arrest on a misdemeanor offense is “far from clearly established,” according to the Eighth Circuit, the question of whether Defendant is entitled to qualified … If Defendant had probable cause to arrest, under the circumstances, his actions would receive qualified immunity. Veatch, 627 F.3d at 1259 .

    Cited 1 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.