Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2016

10,000+ results

3.72s

  • Webb v. Greene County Sheriff's Office

    494 F. Supp. 2d 779 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 6, 2007

    Even where an officer has violated a plaintiffs constitutional rights, that officer is entitled to qualified immunity if the right that he violated was not “clearly established” at the time of the violation. … As the right that Keller is accused of violating was clearly established at the time of the *795 arrest, he is not entitled to qualified immunity. 4.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • White v. Town of Chapel Hill

    899 F. Supp. 1428 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 6, 1995

    Examining a claim of qualified immunity requires “(1) identification of the specific right allegedly violated; (2) determining whether at the time of the alleged violation the right was clearly established; and (3) if so, … establish’ a right for qualified immunity purposes.”

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Galveston Independent School District v. Clear Lake Rehabilitation Hospital, L.L.C.

    324 S.W.3d 802 · Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Nov 24, 2010

    Referencing Braun, the court held “that the establishment of the self funded group medical insurance program by [the school district] is a governmental function and that governmental immunity applies.” Id. at 779-80. … (“We do not see how H & H Sand’s allegation of unilateral modification establishes a waiver of governmental immunity under [section 271.152’s] requirement that a contract be ‘properly executed on behalf of the local governmental

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Mueller v. Rogers

    Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 10, 2009

    The legal issues involved in that appeal- whether Aguilar violated clearly established consti- tutional protections — are identical to those govern- ing the question of Aguilar’s qualified immunity. … I therefore concur only in the majority’s conclusion that Detective Rogers is entitled to qualified immunity from Eric’s procedural due process claims because there was no clearly established law guiding Detective Rogers’

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Glover by and Through Glover v. Donnell

    878 F. Supp. 898 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Mar 2, 1995

    If this were a correct characterization of the basis of her claim, then Donnell would clearly enjoy immunity, for the law in Mississippi remains that public officials who are sued merely because they exercise authority over … a particular governmental program or institution are entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Mladek v. Day

    293 F. Supp. 2d 1297 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Nov 20, 2003

    Mladek has alleged sufficient facts to establish a violation of a clearly established constitutional right, thus overcoming the employee’s qualified immunity defense. I. Mr. Mladek’s Fourth Amendment Claims A. … Mladek overcomes his qualified immunity defense.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Leachman v. Dretke

    261 S.W.3d 297 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 10, 2008

    After a government official asserts the affirmative defense of qualified immunity, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that the defendant’s conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Therefore, as to Oncken’s qualified immunity defense, Leachman failed to show that her conduct violated any clearly-established statutory or constitutional right because he failed to state any constitutional claims in his

    Cited 184 timesPublished
  • Lisa Demaree v. John Krause

    880 F.3d 1066 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 23, 2018

    “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … established We move to the second step of the qualified immunity inquiry—whether the relevant judicial precedents at the time of the incident clearly gave notice that what happened here violated the Demaree family’s Fourth

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • James Harold Peterson Paula Peterson v. City of Plymouth Michael Ridgley David Lindman Mark Bevins

    60 F.3d 469 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 14, 1995

    If the officers did not have probable cause, a second inquiry is necessary to determine whether the officers are nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity. 6 The officers *474 are immune from liability if, in light of clearly … In light of this clearly established law, Officer Ridgley did not act in an objectively reasonable manner.

    Cited 117 timesPublished
  • Rhodes v. Torres

    901 S.W.2d 794 · Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Jun 22, 1995

    The test under federal immunity law for such claims is as follows: “[W]e look to whether a reasonable official could have believed his or her conduct to be lawful in light of clearly established law and the information possessed … Rhodes was lawful in light of clearly established law and the information he possessed at the time he filed the motion to revoke her probation.

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • Harris Ex Rel. the Estate of Jkhary Craft v. Lasseigne

    602 F. App'x 218 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 4, 2015

    Lasseigne is entitled to qualified immunity if the court determines that his actions in shooting Craft “did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … It was clearly established at the time of the shooting that an officer violates the Fourth Amendment if he shoots a suspect without “probable cause to believe that the No. 14-1033 Harris v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Chew v. Gates

    744 F. Supp. 952 · District Court, C.D. California · Aug 31, 1990

    Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), grants qualified immunity to government officials performing discretionary functions as long as their conduct does not violate clearly established … The question of whether a government official has qualified immunity for an action turns on the “ ‘objective legal reasonableness’ of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • McDonald v. City of Freeport, Tex.

    834 F. Supp. 921 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 5, 1993

    To be entitled to qualified immunity, a governmental official must have been performing discretionary functions, and his conduct must not have violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … established law for purposes of qualified immunity inquiries.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Leonhardt v. Akron

    2019 Ohio 5223 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 18, 2019

    clearly established law and the information the officer possessed. … We therefore conclude the trial court erred in finding Officers Sams and Smith were entitled to qualified immunity. {¶37} Dr.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Marin Piazza v. Aponte Roque

    668 F. Supp. 63 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · May 20, 1987

    Defendants claim qualified immunity from damages on the theory that they did not violate clearly established law. … We therefore hold that defendants’ conduct violated plaintiffs’ clearly established due process rights, and that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. 2.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Charles Brumitt v. Sam Smith

    Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 20, 2024

    circumstances was ‘clearly established.’” … denying qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • LeRod Butler v. City of Detroit, Mich.

    936 F.3d 410 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 22, 2019

    “Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Kisela v. Hughes, 138 S. … was clearly established.”

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • Maxcie Thomas v. Houston Talley

    Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 25, 2001

    Qualified immunity "shield[s] [government 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 … immunity ... typically, the issue whether the federal right allegedly infringed was 'clearly established' " (emphasis in original).

    Cited 0 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
  • Barajas v. Waters

    815 F. Supp. 222 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 11, 1993

    Qualified Immunity In their motion for dismissal, or alternatively, summary judgment, defendants raised the defense of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity is not, however, available as a defense if the officer knew or reasonably should have known that the law clearly proscribes the action taken and that the action violated clearly established statutory or

    Cited 0 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.