Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1851

10,000+ results

1.84s

  • Blair v. Meade

    76 F.3d 97 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 16, 1996

    Meade has qualified immunity. … The qualified immunity analysis requires consideration of whether a right exists at all, i.e., whether plaintiff has asserted violation of a right, and whether that right was clearly established. • The motivation question

    Cited 39 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • 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).

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • 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).

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Wilson v. City of Des Moines

    160 F. Supp. 2d 1038 · District Court, S.D. Iowa · Jul 25, 2001

    Katz, — U.S. -, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (June 18, 2001) changed the landscape of qualified immunity. … Second, if a violation is established, courts are to determine whether the right was clearly established “on a more specific level than recognized by the [Ninth Circuit] Court of Appeals.” Id. at 2155.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • 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 .

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Vaughan v. Cox

    316 F.3d 1210 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 3, 2003

    immunity. … We reinstate our prior decision in its entirety and supplement, by this opinion, our previous discussion of qualified immunity. SO ORDERED. .

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • 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.”

    Cited 32 timesPublished
  • 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.

    Cited 95 timesPublished
  • Arthur Knight v. City of Miami

    Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 6, 2002

    CARNES, Circuit Judge: This appeal by a law enforcement officer from the denial of qualified immunity presents us with these three issues: 1) whether there was an absence of probable cause for the officer’s arrest … Cannon, 174 F.3d 1271, 1283 n.3 (11th Cir. 1999) (“Arguable probable cause, not the higher standard of actual probable cause, governs the qualified immunity inquiry.”); Montoute v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • 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.’” 

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Johnson v. Bay Area Rapid Transit

    790 F. Supp. 2d 1034 · District Court, N.D. California · May 10, 2011

    The court, however, granted qualified immunity to MacPherson, stating that as of 2005, it was not clearly established that such use was unconstitutional. Id. at 833 . … Nor is Gee entitled to qualified immunity. The law as to extended detentions absent the indicia of probable cause was clearly established at the time of the incident.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Joseph Carl Brown v. Joseph Ponte

    842 F.2d 16 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Mar 14, 1988

    As a result, the qualified immunity defense is available to appellants. … If the law at the time of appellants’ actions was not “clearly established,” they could not have “known” that their conduct was forbidden. Id.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 5 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
  • 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

    Cited 8 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.