Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2016

10,000+ results

3.59s

  • Bell v. Marseilles Elementary School

    160 F. Supp. 2d 883 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 29, 2001

    “A qualified immunity analysis entails a purely objective inquiry to determine whether, at the time of the alleged illegal act, the right asserted by the plaintiff was clearly established in the particular factual context … Board of Educ., 894 F.Supp. 386, 390 (D.Kan.1995) (the law regarding student strip searches is clearly established); Konop, 26 F.Supp.2d at 1196 (denying qualified immunity because “the holding in T.L.O. is not, in any way

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Ager v. Office of Director of Regulation

    1 Am. Tribal Law 380 · Mohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court · Oct 30, 1997

    It is well established that Indian tribes possess the “common-law immunity from suit traditionally enjoyed by sovereign powers”, Santa Clara, Pueblo v. … 502 of Article V of M.T.O. 95-4 specifies that nothing in the ordinance establishing the Gaming Disputes Court “shall be construed as a waiver of the sovereign immunity of the Tribe, the Authority or the Tribe’s other enterprises

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • Bernier v. Trump

    299 F. Supp. 3d 150 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 8, 2018

    The court held: Plaintiff's Bivens claims are easily dismissed on the second prong of the qualified immunity test because the rights Plaintiff claims were violated were not clearly established at the time the alleged violations … As noted above, this court dismissed Plaintiff's Bivens claim on the second "clearly established" prong of the qualified immunity test. See Pearson v.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Greenaway v. County of Nassau

    97 F. Supp. 3d 225 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 31, 2015

    The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was clearly established at the time of the violation.” Garcia, 43 F.Supp.3d at 289 . … .-, 134 S.Ct. 1861, 1866 , 188 L.Ed.2d 895 (2014) (noting that courts evaluating qualified immunity must “draw[] inferences in favor of the nonmovant, even when ... a court decides only the clearly-established prong of the

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Estate of Alvarado ex rel. Alvarado v. Shavatt

    673 F. App'x 777 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 18, 2017

    Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity from suits for damages unless (1) a plaintiff alleges facts that make out a constitutional violation, and (2) the right at issue was clearly established at the time … Because we reverse on this ground, we do not address Shavatt’s arguments about whether the right at issue was clearly established.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Meadours Ex Rel. Estate of Meadours v. Ermel

    483 F.3d 417 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 3, 2007

    The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability "‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established . . . constitutional rights of which … Second, we determine whether the officers' conduct was objectively reasonable in light of "clearly established" law at the time of the alleged violation. Goodson v.

    Cited 143 timesPublished
  • Johnson v. Outboard Marine Corp.

    172 F.3d 531 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 24, 1999

    The court similarly found that the private defendants were also entitled to qualified immunity and dismissed them from the suit. Rumery and Johnson appeal, contesting the court's findings of qualified immunity. II. … We find the issue of qualified immunity is misplaced for two reasons.

    Cited 900 timesPublished
  • City of Brooksville v. Warner

    533 S.W.3d 688 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Mar 17, 2017

    Because the safe driving of a police vehicle is a ministerial act, Hause is not entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs negligent driving claim. … For this reason, and to ensure that governmental officials will exercise discretion when needed, our law allows qualified immunity from suit on the performance of discretionary acts.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Lopez v. San Luis Valley, Board of Cooperative Educational Services

    977 F. Supp. 1422 · District Court, D. Colorado · Oct 17, 1997

    the clearly established law. … Therefore, defendants Espinoza and Henderson did not violate any “clearly established” law in 1994 and 1995, and they are entitled to summary judgment on their defense of qualified immunity.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Thomas Leonard v. Stephen Robinson, in His Individual Capacity

    477 F.3d 347 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 2, 2007

    Robinson has asserted the defense of qualified immunity. … “Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

    Cited 126 timesPublished
  • Delaney v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority

    24 F. Supp. 3d 121 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 4, 2014

    Qualified Immunity For much the same reason, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … “A right is clearly established and immunity will not issue only if ‘every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right.’ ” Id. at 50-51 (quoting Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Blackshear v. City of Miami Beach

    799 F. Supp. 2d 1338 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 26, 2011

    QUALIFIED IMMUNITY STANDARD “[Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities as long as their conduct violates no clearly established statutory or constitutional … Defendant Wyatt is not entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Figueroa-Rodriguez v. Lopez-Rivera

    878 F.2d 1478 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Apr 25, 1989

    Harlow, supra (government officials enjoy “qualified immunity” where the law does not “clearly” forbid their actions). … In Mendez-Palou, 813 F.2d at 1259 , this circuit said that the question in a “qualified immunity” case, such as this one, is “whether [at the time of dismissal] it was clearly established that employees in the particular

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Ortiz v. Kazimer

    811 F.3d 848 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 4, 2016

    This use of force was clearly established as excessive before 2010. … His lack of action on this record establishes a cognizable claim that he violated Juan’s clearly established constitutional rights. State-law claims.

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Jacobs v. West Feliciana Sheriff's Department

    228 F.3d 388 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 2, 2000

    To determine whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, we must determine: (1) whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right; and (2) if so, … As noted above, we have observed that at least since 1989, it has been clearly established that officials will only be liable for episodic acts or omissions resulting in the violation of a detainee’s clearly established

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Howes v. Hitchcock

    66 F. Supp. 2d 203 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 9, 1999

    conduct violated clearly established law.” … To prevail on their qualified immunity defense, the officers must first establish that a prudent police officer with the information they collectively possessed reasonably could have believed that probable cause to arrest

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Novoselsky v. Brown

    822 F.3d 342 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 10, 2016

    Qualified Immunity on First Amendment Claim We turn next to Brown’s qualified immunity defense to Novoselsky’s § 1983 First Amendment retaliation claim. … Qualified immunity protects government agents from liability for their actions so long as they did not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

    Cited 72 timesPublished
  • Sabrina Jordan v. John Howard

    987 F.3d 537 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 3, 2021

    a genuine dispute of material fact for trial and that the officers were protected by qualified immunity—because they did not violate McShann’s clearly established rights by using deadly force in response to threatened deadly … The district court found that Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate McShann’s clearly established constitutional rights and their use of deadly force was objectively reasonable.

    Cited 33 timesPublished
  • D.H., Ex Rel. Dawson v. Clayton County School District

    830 F.3d 1306 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 29, 2016

    Clearly Established Law “A right may be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes in one of three ways: (1) case law with indistinguishable facts clearly establishing the constitutional right; (2) a broad … established constitutional right and is entitled to qualified immunity against D.H.’s § 1983 claim.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Gooden v. Howard County Maryland

    917 F.2d 1355 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Nov 9, 1990

    A The defense of qualified immunity generally protects “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … was no clearly established law guiding their conduct.

    Cited 10 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.