Case law

Rosenbaum v. Washoe County

654 F.3d 1001 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 22, 2011

so, whether that right was clearly established at the time of the event. … Ct. at 2083 (holding that an official is not entitled to qualified immunity where “every reasonable official” would have understood that he was violating a clearly established right (emphasis added) (internal quotation marks

Johnson v. City of Ecorse

137 F. Supp. 2d 886 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 29, 2001

Qualified Immunity Officers Smith and Herring plead the defense of qualified immunity. … The standard for that defense is that governmental officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity, which shields them from civil damages, provided their conduct did not violate a clearly-established

Hansen v. California Department of Corrections

920 F. Supp. 1480 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 25, 1996

If, rationally, what the state of the law was is a close question, the law cannot be deemed “clearly established” for purposes of qualified immunity. … California Statutory Immunity California has no qualified immunity law similar to federal qualified immunity.

Estate of Burke v. Mahanoy City

40 F. Supp. 2d 274 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 3, 1999

violated clearly established federal law.” … The Supreme Court has explained what it means by clearly established law for the purpose of qualified immunity: The contours of the right must be suffi.ciently clear that a reasonable official would understand what he is

Lopez v. Youngblood

609 F. Supp. 2d 1125 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 31, 2009

Re: Court Returnees, Qualified Immunity and Eleventh Amendment Immunity 16). … Re: Court Returnees, Qualified Immunity and Eleventh Amendment Immunity 20-21).

Don Meadows v. Rockford Housing Authority

861 F.3d 672 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 30, 2017

Qualified immunity protects state officials from liability for civil damages unless the plaintiff can show “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established … A right is clearly established when existing precedent has placed the right’s existence “beyond debate.” Reichle v. Howards, 132 S. Ct. 2088, 2093 (2012).

Massi v. Flynn

254 F. App'x 84 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 16, 2007

Our jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine is limited to whether, as a matter of law, Flynn is entitled to qualified immunity “either because the law was not clearly established or because, on the facts assumed … Instead, we ask only “whether the facts alleged ... support a claim of violation of clearly established law.” Id. at 528 n. 9, 105 S.Ct. 2806 .

M.P., a Minor v. Monroe Local Schools

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2021

"An official sued under §1983 is entitled to qualified immunity unless it is shown that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was 'clearly established' at the time of the challenged conduct." … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982) (Qualified immunity shields "government officials performing discretionary functions . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Nassau County Employee "L" v. County of Nassau

345 F. Supp. 2d 293 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 29, 2004

“The *301 qualified immunity doctrine shields ‘government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … “In determining whether a particular legal principle was ‘clearly established’ for purposes of qualified immunity,” the Second Circuit has considered three factors: “whether the right was defined with reasonable specificity

Ruiz-Bueno v. Scott

639 F. App'x 354 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 2, 2016

Whether a defendant receives qualified immunity turns on two questions: did the defendant violate a constitutionally protected right, and if so, was the right clearly established at the time the act was committed? … In determining whether clearly established law has been violated, we examine the “objective legal reasonableness of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.”

Stanley Joseph v. Kenneth Allen

712 F.3d 1222 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 15, 2013

Qualified immunity shields law enforcement officers from suit if they “[did] not violate [a] clearly established statutory or constitutional right[] of which a reasonable person would have known.” Gorra v. … However, qualified immunity allows officers to make reasonable errors, Habiger v.

Hassell v. Fischer

879 F.3d 41 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 3, 2018

 immunity because they had  violated  clearly  established  law,  announced  in  Earley  I,  when  they  administratively  added  and  then  applied  the  conditions  of  a  PRS  term  to  Hassell.7  The  District  Court …   clearly  established  statutory  or  constitutional  rights  of  which a reasonable person would have known.’” 

Joseph v. Donahue

392 F. Supp. 3d 973 · District Court, D. Maine · May 28, 2019

"Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability and the burdens of litigation in a § 1983 action *984 unless the official's conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which … A police officer is entitled to qualified immunity unless the facts shown by the plaintiff establish "(1) that a plaintiff's constitutional rights have been violated, and (2) those rights were so clearly established at the

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.

Mettler Ex Rel. Burnett v. Nellis

280 Wis. 2d 753 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · Mar 22, 2005

We conclude that O'Connor's affidavit is sufficient to qualify her to give her opinions. … containing those opinions should be considered at summary judgment. 5 Nellis does not argue that expert opinion is inappropriate, only that O'Connor's affidavit is insufficient. 6 Nellis argues that O'Connor's affidavit does not establish

Riverdale Mills Corp. v. United States

337 F. Supp. 2d 247 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 16, 2004

In evaluating a claim for qualified immunity, a court must determine: 1) whether the plaintiffs allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation, 2) whether the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged … The answer to each inquiry must be affirmative to overcome a defense of qualified immunity. Id. The Court is underwhelmed by defendants’ arguments that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Gay Activists Alliance v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma

638 P.2d 1116 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 22, 1981

The Court added that “[a] compensatory award will be appropriate only if the school board member has acted with such an impermissible motivation or with such disregard of the student’s clearly established constitutional rights … The Regents did not act with such disregard for the established law as to deny them qualified immunity. There had been no relevant pronouncements by this Court or by the Tenth Circuit interpreting Oklahoma law.

Fennell v. Simmons

951 F. Supp. 706 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 3, 1997

right was not clearly established. … established, 7 so as to entitle the defendants to judgment on all of Torcasio’s claims of relief on the basis of qualified immunity.

Juan Angel Torres v. United States

200 F.3d 179 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 29, 1999

Ct. 2393 (1999). 16 Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, "[g]overnment officials performing discretionary functions are`shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … The inquiry when a defendant claims qualified immunity is "whether a reasonable officer could have believed that his or her conduct was lawful, in light of the clearly established law and the information in the officer's

Berry v. Craftsman

148 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.