Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1924

10,000+ results

2.39s

  • 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.

    Cited 22 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • Buchanan v. Metz

    6 F. Supp. 3d 730 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Jul 15, 2014

    Bogle, 92 Fed.Appx. 165, 169 (6th Cir.2004) (“Although a request for monetary damages alone may not suffice to establish the requisite notice, the assertion of a qualified-immunity defense (even a contingent qualified-immunity … These functions clearly relate to the decision to prosecute, to which absolute immunity absolutely applies.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Michael W. Showers v. Steven A. Spangler

    182 F.3d 165 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 29, 1999

    "[G]overnment officials performing discretionary functions generally are granted a qualified immunity and are `shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 27 timesPublished
  • Liffiton v. Keuker

    850 F.2d 73 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 21, 1988

    Even if they are not entitled to absolute immunity, they may be entitled to qualified immunity if their actions were objectively reasonable under clearly established law. Harlow v. … Such an action is neither clearly prosecutorial in nature, entitling him to absolute immunity, nor objectively reasonable under clearly established law, entitling him to qualified immunity. 24 Therefore, the complaint states

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • Batiste v. City of Beaumont

    421 F. Supp. 2d 969 · District Court, E.D. Texas · Nov 10, 2005

    As the doctrine exists today, qualified immunity shields state officials from personal suits for acts in their official capacity insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person … The concept of conduct objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law is difficult to grasp.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Coones v. Board of County Commissioners

    Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 21, 2026

    Yehia, 38 F.4th 1282, 1294 (10th Cir. 2022) (“[G]eneral statements of the law can clearly establish a right for qualified immunity purposes if they apply with obvious clarity to the specific conduct in question.” … In particular, we focused in Cox on the plaintiff’s failure to adequately brief the question of clearly established law in response to the defendant’s assertion of qualified immunity. See id. at 1245–46.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Webb v. Jessamine County Fiscal Court

    802 F. Supp. 2d 870 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Aug 5, 2011

    To avoid summary judgment based on an assertion of qualified immunity, Plaintiff must first show “a violation of a constitutional right” and that the violated right “was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the defendant’ … Summary judgment is, thus, precluded on the basis of qualified immunity for Teaven so long as the violated right “was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.” Pearson v.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Parks v. Pomeroy

    387 F.3d 949 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 20, 2004

    plaintiff can establish a constitutional violation, he is entitled to qualified immunity. … This "clearly established" standard must be met in order to permit the denial of qualified immunity. For these inquiries, we conduct a de novo review. See, e.g., Tuggle v.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Marin v. Gonzales, et al.

    2005 DNH 167 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Dec 19, 2005

    Qualified Immunity. … 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

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Verret v. Alabama Department of Mental Health

    511 F. Supp. 2d 1166 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Sep 20, 2007

    “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Consequently, this Court will follow the binding precedent established by Davis and hold that Waters’ violation of policy 20-16 does not forfeit her right to qualified immunity. b.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Willoughby v. Luster

    717 F. Supp. 1439 · District Court, D. Nevada · May 2, 1989

    On the basis of these affidavits, they argue that they are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity. … This finding, however, does not preclude defendants from renewing their claim of qualified immunity after the factual circumstances surrounding Willoughby’s disciplinary hearing have been more fully established.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Limones v. School District of Lee County

    111 So. 3d 901 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 6, 2013

    “It is clearly established that one who undertakes to act, even when under no obligation to do so, thereby becomes obligated to act with reasonable care.” Union Park Mem’l Chapel v. Hutt, 670 So.2d 64, 66-67 (Fla.1996). … as establishing a civil liability.”

    Reversed on other grounds by Abel Limones, Sr. v. School District of Lee County, 40 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 182 (2015)Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Forest v. Pawtucket Police Department

    290 F. Supp. 2d 215 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Oct 22, 2003

    The Doctrine of Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established … If the court finds the parties’ submissions demonstrate a constitutional violation, the next step is to determine whether the right was clearly established. Id.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Willis v. Arp

    165 F. Supp. 3d 1357 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Feb 29, 2016

    Officials seeking qualified immunity must first establish that they were acting within their discretionary authority when the alleged constitutional violation occurred. Lewis v. City of W. … Second, Plaintiff must show that “the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.” Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232 , 129 S.Ct. 808 (quoting Saucier v.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Moore v. Lightfoot

    286 F. App'x 844 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 27, 2008

    Under the second prong of the qualified immunity test, however, we find that Guyton’s actions were objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law. Guyton took measures to protect Moore from danger. … Guyton is, therefore, entitled to qualified immunity. B.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Sarah Wilson v. Eric Gregory

    3 F. 4th 844 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 1, 2021

    But in this case, our federal qualified immunity analysis turns on the “clearly established” prong. … because Ohio statutory immunity does not turn on whether a particular right was clearly established.

    Cited 39 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.