Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
4.43s
18 S.W.3d 310 · Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) · May 18, 2000
Therefore, in view of the confusion regarding the terms, “official immunity” and “qualified immunity,” it is not clear from the record that appellees presented the affirmative defense of “qualified immunity” to the trial … Thus, we do not consider the merit of “qualified immunity” as a ground for summary judgment in favor of Williams, individually.
Cited 14 timesPublished939 F.2d 638 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 26, 1991
“Whether an official may prevail in [her] qualified immunity defense depends upon the ‘objective reasonableness of [her] conduct as measured by reference to clearly established law.’ ... … No other ‘circumstances’ are relevant to the issue of qualified immunity.” Davis v.
Cited 34 timesPublishedBaumeister v. New Mexico Commission for the Blind
425 F. Supp. 2d 1250 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Mar 20, 2006
. § 1983 generally are entitled to qualified immunity unless it is shown that their actions violated a specific constitutional right and that the right which they allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of … P. 12(b)(6), and “[ujnless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.”
Cited 3 timesPublishedLIBERTY COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT Et Al. v. HALLIBURTON
328 Ga. App. 422 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jul 31, 2014
Defendants moved to dismiss on grounds including that defendants were entitled to sovereign and/or qualified immunity. … And “[a] waiver of sovereign immunity must be established by the party seeking to benefit from that waiver.” Ruff, 315 Ga. App. at 456 (footnote omitted).
Overruled on other grounds by Rivera v. Washington, 298 Ga. 770 (2016)Cited 19 timesPublished572 F. Supp. 2d 446 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 27, 2008
“[Pjublic officials ... are protected by qualified immunity from civil liability for actions taken in their official capacity, if those actions were objectively reasonable in light of clearly established rules then extant … “Hence, a defendant is not liable if he did not violate clearly established law or it was objectively reasonable for him to believe that he was not violating clearly established law.”
Cited 3 timesPublished304 Md. 164 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 4, 1985
The privilege, and the resultant immunity enjoyed by the publisher, may be either absolute or qualified. As we explained in DiBlasio v. … immunity.”
Cited 59 timesPublished247 F. App'x 738 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 7, 2007
Willis also bears the burden of establishing that the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. Smoak v. Hall, 460 F.3d 768, 778 (6th Cir.2006). … This court has previously held, as did the district court, that Tennessee law provides qualified or good faith immunity of government employees for state law torts. Rogers v.
Cited 6 timesUnpublishedCrosby v. University of Kentucky
863 F.3d 545 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 17, 2017
The doctrine of qualified immunity protects “government officials performing discretionary functions ,.. from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … The closest precedent in this circuit, in fact, noted that this area of law was not so clearly established as to overcome the defense of qualified immunity. See Garvie v.
Cited 61 timesPublishedRamirez-Lluveras v. Pagan-Cruz
833 F. Supp. 2d 151 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Oct 3, 2011
Qualified Immunity The qualified immunity doctrine is an “escape hatch” from a state actor’s liability under section 1983. … A state actor does not benefit from qualified immunity if: (1) the plaintiff makes out a violation of a constitutional right that (2) was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged violation. Id.
Cited 10 timesPublished953 F. Supp. 1352 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Jul 31, 1996
The state defendants contend that, in their individual capacities, they are immune from damages under the well-established doctrine of qualified immunity. … Instead, the question in this case, as in all qualified immunity cases, is fact specific: in May 1991, was it clearly established in this circuit that it was unconstitutional for a mental institution to fail to supervise
Cited 3 timesPublishedHill v. Taconic Developmental Disabilities Services Office
57 F. App'x 9 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 2, 2002
‘good faith’ qualified immunity cannot attach.” … ’t do it’ or that it was objectively reasonable for him to believe that his action did not violate clearly established law.”
Cited 4 timesPublishedDoctor Awanna Leslie v. Hancock County Board of Education
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 12, 2013
had was not clearly established. … “[T]o obtain qualified immunity, an official must first establish that he acted within his discretionary authority.”
Cited 0 timesPublished452 S.W.3d 575 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 11, 2014
clearly established and raised a genuine issue of fact as to whether the official would have known that the conduct violated that clearly established right. … her actions did not violate clearly established principles of law of which a reasonable person would have knowledge.
Cited 13 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · Apr 12, 2022
Qualified immunity requires a two-pronged analysis: “whether the plaintiff has stated a plausible claim for violation of a constitutional or statutory right and whether the right was clearly established at the time of … Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. Based on this finding, the Court need not determine whether an implicated right was clearly established at the time.
Cited 0 timesUnknown148 N.J. Super. 366 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 17, 1977
The intent of this statute is clearly to establish immunity for all governmental bodies except in conformity with the statute, N. J. S. A. 59 :1-2. English v. Newark Housing Auth., 138 N. J. Super. 425, 428 (App. … A. 59 :1-2 clearly dictates that defendant may not be held liable.
Cited 0 timesPublished735 F. Supp. 996 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Apr 10, 1990
Plaintiff’s right to be in the room and to perform the duties of a reporter is clearly established under Perry Education Ass’n v. … In light of the above facts clearly in dispute which are material to defendant’s claim of immunity, I find that an appeal of the denial of the defendant’s summary judgment motion on the issue of qualified immunity is baseless
Cited 1 timesPublished956 F. Supp. 2d 819 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 9, 2013
Raker’s qualified immunity defense. … clearly established as early as 1964.”
Cited 1 timesPublished654 F. Supp. 1082 · District Court, D. Colorado · Feb 12, 1987
Alternatively, defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate clearly established constitutional rights which a reasonable investigator would have known. … Under Harlow , then, qualified immunity is established if it is proven that there was no violation of clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.
Cited 2 timesPublished326 F.3d 702 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 16, 2003
As governmental officials acting within the scope of their duty, Urbank and Summers can claim qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense shielding governmental officials from liability as long as their conduct does “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would
Cited 97 timesPublishedBrockinton v. City of Sherwood
503 F.3d 667 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 4, 2007
Qualified immunity protects governmental officials from liability for civil damages when they are performing discretionary functions and their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … “[T]o withstand a motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, a civil rights plaintiff must (1) assert a violation of a constitutional right; (2)demonstrate that the alleged right is clearly established; and
Cited 169 timesPublished
Ask Donna