Case law

Hlad Ex Rel. Shipley v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Ass'n

305 F. Supp. 2d 830 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Feb 27, 2004

Qualified Immunity Under the qualified immunity doctrine, “government officials who perform discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … Accordingly, the Court concludes that, even if the qualified immunity doctrine applies to Defendant Carter, he has not established that he is entitled to application of qualified immunity at this stage of the litigation.

In re Roberts Litigation

97 F. Supp. 3d 1239 · District Court, D. Montana · Mar 19, 2015

“If the law did not put the officer on notice that his conduct would be clearly unlawful, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is appropriate.” Saucier v. … A two-part process for analyzing the application of qualified immunity is established in Saticier. The initial inquiry focuses on whether the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right. Id.

Massie v. Cobb County

255 F. Supp. 3d 1302 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Jun 1, 2017

Accordingly, even if Gallimore’s conduct did violate Massie’s Fourth Amendment rights, that, violation did not run afoul of clearly established law, and Gallimore is entitled to qualified immunity. Smith v. … In' response, Massie argues in a cursory fashion that “the record in this case clearly establishes that ... Gallimore acted with actual malice.” [44] at 19. ...

Remo Benigni, Dba the Silver Fox v. City of Hemet Roger Miller Jesse Pease Scott Jernigan

879 F.2d 473 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 15, 1989

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY This question is properly before the court because the individual defendants moved for a directed verdict on the basis of qualified immunity and subsequently offered it as a ground for judgment NOV. … Thus we conclude that any error in the qualified immunity instruction was harmless.

Olzinski v. MacIona

714 F. Supp. 401 · District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Jun 7, 1989

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity from suit on the claims for money damages because they “could not have reasonably known that their conduct violated any well established … Once the issue of qualified immunity is properly injected into a case by a motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating the existence of the allegedly “clearly established” constitutional right

Roger Trent v. Steven Wade

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 9, 2015

The doctrine of qualified immunity “insulate[s]” state officials from liability to the extent that the officials’ actions do not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.” … ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”

Delatte v. Genovese

228 So. 2d 252 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 17, 1969

Defendant asserted the judicial immunity conferred by Louisiana Constitution Art. VII, Secs. 70, 71 and 72, and the qualified personal immunity provided pursuant to LSA-R.S. 33 .T555 and LSA-R.S. 28:52. … In Burns, defendant asserted absolute immunity under La.Const. Art. VII, Secs. 70, 71 and 72, and also claimed qualified or conditional immunity.

Hicks v. Feeney

850 F.2d 152 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 22, 1988

Finally, the district court found that because Hicks’s rights were not “clearly established” at the time of the violation, Feeney was entitled to qualified immunity. Id. at 1515. … If it were clearly established that this confinement violated Hicks’s constitutional rights, then Feeney does not have qualified immunity. Id.

Dormu v. District of Columbia

795 F. Supp. 2d 7 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 7, 2011

If no constitutional right was violated, qualified immunity is appropriate. Id. … Under the second step of the qualified immunity analysis, the officers would nonetheless be immune from suit if Dormu’s Fourth Amendment rights were not clearly established at the time of the arrest.

Houghton v. Culver

452 F. Supp. 2d 212 · District Court, W.D. New York · Sep 21, 2006

Qualified immunity shields public officials “from civil damages liability insofar as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known,’ Harlow … We further conclude that Lynch has not established that he is entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity on any of Curry’s claims”); Thomas v.

Anderson v. Recore

446 F.3d 324 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 4, 2006

II “[Pjublic officials ... are protected by qualified immunity from civil liability for actions taken in their official capacity, if those actions were objectively reasonable in light of clearly established rules then extant … Defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

Doan v. Watson

168 F. Supp. 2d 932 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Oct 10, 2001

Qualified immunity Defendants contend that they should enjoy qualified immunity for their administration of the strip-search procedure, pursuant to § 1983. … Officials acting under qualified immunity are not subjected to suit “unless their actions violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights then known to a reasonable officer.” Ulichny v. Merton Cmty. Sch.

Alexander v. University Of North Florida

39 F.3d 290 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 2, 1994

PER CURIAM: 1 Principles of qualified immunity control this case. … But, nothing in Cornelius comes close to the "clearly established" standard required to overcome the qualified immunity defense in this case.

Kyle Rusness v. Becker County, Minnesota

31 F.4th 606 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 12, 2022

Qualified immunity “shields government officials from liability when their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a -10- reasonable person would … Qualified immunity analysis involves two inquiries: (1) whether there has been a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the violation. Saucier v.

Mann v. Palmerton Area School District

189 F. Supp. 3d 467 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 2, 2016

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that even if Plaintiffs can establish their state-created danger claim, Coach Walkowiak is entitled to qualified immunity. … In analyzing whether the coach was entitled to qualified immunity, the Third Circuit explained that although district court opinions “may be relevant to the determination of when a right was clearly established for qualified

Glaspie v. Mahoney

973 F. Supp. 401 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 20, 1997

from constitutional tort liability; and that defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. 10 See Defts.’ … DISCUSSION Qualified Immunity The Supreme Court has clearly defined those situations where government officials enjoy qualified immunity in performing discretionary functions: [T]he[se] defendants enjoy a qualified immunity

State of New Jersey v. C.C.W.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 29, 2025

However, to qualify for the OPA immunity, a defendant must also establish that the acute condition "result[ed] from the consumption or use of a [CDS]." Ibid. … The definition is comprised of three elements, all of which must be established to qualify for immunity: (1) the person must exhibit an "acute condition[,]" (2) "the acute condition must be 'resulting from the consumption

Allen v. Sakai

40 F.3d 1001 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 15, 1994

Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity only “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … established constitutional rights, defeating defendants’ claims to qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage.

Joann Cavalieri, as Plenary Guardian of the Estate of Steven Cavalieri, a Disabled Person v. Donald Shepard

321 F.3d 616 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 20, 2003

asserting was not clearly established at the time of these events. … Ryan, 957 F.2d 402, 406 (7th Cir.1992), was clearly established prior to 1998.

OONA R.-S. BY KATE S. v. Santa Rosa City Schools

890 F. Supp. 1452 · District Court, N.D. California · May 2, 1995

If the plaintiff does establish such intent, there can be no qualified immunity. … In order to defeat a qualified immunity claim at this stage in a section 1983 action, a plaintiff must sufficiently allege the deprivation of a clearly established right secured by federal statutory or constitutional law.