Case law

Edward Ray, Jr. v. E. Lara

31 F.4th 692 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 11, 2022

It has long been established that prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity from damages suits under § 1983 for activities that are “intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process.” Imbler v. … LARA that Ray does not qualify for the imminent danger exception to § 1915(g). 9 IV Because Ray has both accumulated three strikes and failed to establish a sufficient nexus between

David L. McCartney, M.D. Darryl Williams, M.D. And Dorma Kohler v. Donald R. May, M.D.

Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo) · Jun 7, 2001

overcome their entitlement to qualified immunity. … (footnote: 4) Appellants have failed to conclusively establish McCartney and Williams’s qualified immunity on May’s substantive due process claims.

Erskine v. Commissioner of Corrections

682 A.2d 681 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Aug 15, 1996

In their answer, the defendants raised the affirmative defenses of sovereign and qualified immunity, M.R.Civ.P. 8(c). … Despite their knowledge of Robinson’s violent nature, the defendants are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity for purposes of section 1983 liability.

Hilliard v. City & County of Denver

930 F.2d 1516 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 24, 1991

This case is an appeal by defendant police officers from the denial of their motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … The defendants moved to dismiss, arguing that the law controlling their actions was not clearly established, and that they therefore had qualified immunity from suit. 1 The district court dismissed all of the plaintiff’s

Krogh v. Sweeney

195 F. Supp. 3d 1049 · District Court, D. Minnesota · Jul 14, 2016

Sweeney argues that he is immune from suit under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … “[QJualified immunity protects [law enforcement] officers from personal liability under § 1983 insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established ... constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

Freeman v. Blair

862 F.2d 1330 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 30, 1989

See 793 F.2d at 171-73. 3 We turn to the issues of qualified immunity. … defendants are entitled to qualified immunity with respect to plaintiffs' claims concerning defendants' failure to obtain a search warrant, and that none of the defendants is entitled to qualified immunity with respect to

Daniel Scott v. Mary Benson

742 F.3d 335 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 4, 2014

To determine whether qualified immunity applies, we ask “(1) whether the facts alleged or shown, construed in the light most favorable to [Scott], establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right,” and “(2) whether … that constitutional right was clearly established as of [the time of the relevant conduct], such that a reasonable official would have known that [her] actions were unlawful.”

Mayberry v. Spicer

808 F. Supp. 563 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Nov 24, 1992

A Defendant has “qualified immunity unless Plaintiff’s rights were so clearly established when the acts were committed that any officer in the Defendant’s position, measured objectively, would have clearly understood that … To prevail over a claim *567 of qualified immunity, Plaintiff must set forth a particular and clearly established violation. Garvie v. Jackson, 845 F.2d 647, 650 (6th Cir.1988).

Mitchell v. Coffey County Hospital

903 F. Supp. 1415 · District Court, D. Kansas · Sep 25, 1995

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The individual defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiffs due process claim because the law was not clearly established at the time of plaintiffs termination. … This exception to the rule that the qualified immunity defense fails where the defendant violated a clearly established right applies only rarely. Id.

Nash v. Duncan Park Commission

304 Mich. App. 599 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 20, 2014

THE INDENTURE’S USE OF TRUST LANGUAGE Moreover, the document’s language clearly contemplates the establishment of a trust. “[I]t requires no particular form of words to create a trust.” … Although not argued by defendants, we have considered whether the Commission is a “board,” thereby qualifying as immune under MCL 691.1401(e).

Apffel v. Huddleston

50 F. Supp. 2d 1129 · District Court, D. Utah · May 27, 1999

Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … “Qualified immunity spares Defendants the burden of proceeding with the litigation unless Plaintiff can show that Defendants violated ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

Lawrence v. United States

340 F.3d 952 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 21, 2003

Qualified Immunity 8 A district court's decision to grant summary judgment on the grounds of qualified immunity is reviewed de novo. Case v. Kitsap County Sheriff's Dep't, 249 F.3d 921 , 925 (9th Cir.2001). … If the right is not clearly established, the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. Id.

Gonzalez v. Romanisko

744 F. Supp. 95 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 22, 1990

The Defendant, Mastruzzo, here moves for judgment notwithstanding the verdict based on allegations of qualified immunity and insufficiency of the evidence. … The principles of qualified immunity that we have reaffirmed today require that Anderson be permitted to argue that he is entitled to summary judgment on the ground that, in light of the clearly estab *98 lished principles

Taylor v. West Virginia Department of Health & Human resources

237 W. Va. 549 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 14, 2016

Therefore, to the extent that petitioners have established sufficient evidence that the challenged employment actions were a violation of clearly established statutory or constitutional rights or laws of which a reasonable … ’ claims are not barred by qualified immunity.

Avilés v. Figueroa

195 F. Supp. 3d 435 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jul 16, 2016

Qualified Immunity Lastly, this Court how moves to consider whether Co-Defendant Martinez-Ortiz is protected by qualified immunity. The qualified immunity doctrine offers public officials complete immunity from suit. … In order to *449 grant qualified immunity, the First Circuit has clearly laid out a two-step process in which the court must engage: The two-step procedure for assessing a plea of qualified immunity at the motion to dismiss

Christopher Cremeans v. William Wrenn, Christopher Kench, Michael Zenk, Jon Fouts, and Nichole Kipphut

2019 DNH 060 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Mar 28, 2019

capacities are barred by the doctrine of qualified immunity because such a right was not clearly established in 2017. … Qualified immunity shields individual officers from claims for damages “‘unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time

Atkinson v. Taylor

316 F.3d 257 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 21, 2003

Atkinson has fulfilled Saucier 's first prong for denying qualified immunity by alleging a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. … The majority misconstrues the Supreme Court's Eighth Amendment jurisprudence, and, a fortiori, wrongly deems its outcome "clearly established" for purposes of qualified immunity.

Belanger v. City of Hartford

578 F. Supp. 2d 360 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Jun 19, 2008

“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields police officers acting in their official capacity from suits for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , unless their actions violate clearly-established rights of which an objectively … most favorable to the Plaintiff, could conclude that the defendant’s actions were objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law.”

Prisma Zona Exploratoria De Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Calderon

154 F. Supp. 2d 245 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Aug 14, 2001

Defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss based on Eleventh Amendment immunity and qualified immunity grounds. The motion to dismiss stands submitted. … Determination of whether a reasonable official should have understood that a specific conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right, or whether an entity is to be considered an “arm of the state”, are fact intensive

James Cameron v. Richard Thornburgh, Attorney General

983 F.2d 253 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 22, 1993

the defendants therefore had qualified immunity from suit. … protected by qualified immunity.