Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.77s
696 F. Supp. 2d 1109 · District Court, E.D. California · Dec 24, 2009
Whether Weydert and Coffey are Entitled to Qualified Immunity. 6 1. Grounds for Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because it is not clearly established that MUAs are legal. … Weydert and Coffey are “entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show” their actions *1115 violated the Constitution. Pearson v.
Cited 0 timesPublished651 F.3d 1188 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 30, 2011
plaintiff complains violated clearly established law.” … In this case we may review the district court’s denial of Jensen’s motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity because, as we shall see, Jensen’s entitlement to qualified immunity is based on undisputed facts
Cited 16 timesPublishedLanigan v. Village of East Hazel Crest
913 F. Supp. 1202 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 26, 1996
“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials ... from damages unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” Elder v. … Additionally, the doctrine of qualified immunity shields all three officers because their conduct was not unreasonable in light of clearly established law at that time.
Cited 2 timesPublishedArkansas Attorney General Reports · Jul 9, 1991
If a plaintiff could conceive of a viable federal legislative or constitutional claim based upon the facts you have stated, only qualified immunity would exist for individual officers involved, and the actual political subdivisions … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (1987), (stating that test of qualified immunity for individual officers turns upon the "objective legal reasonableness of the action" assessed in light of the legal rules that were "clearly established
Cited 0 timesPublished793 F.2d 1105 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 17, 1986
The Supreme Court has noted, however, that qualified immunity “is an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability____” Mitchell v. … According to the test for qualified immunity established by the Supreme Court, the deputies in this case are immune from liability (and trial) if “their conduct [did] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional
Cited 67 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 20, 2020
The qualified immunity analysis poses two questions: (1) whether a defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) whether the right was clearly established at the 11 This determination hinges on the assumption that … If the warrant was not properly procured, the Officers cannot find protection under qualified immunity for violating Ballheimer’s clearly established right against a warrantless, intrusive medical search. Winston v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDONNA SMITHERS v. TA'TANISHA TWEEDY
Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jun 24, 2025
“The doctrine of official immunity, also known as qualified immunity, offers public officers and employees limited protection from suit in their personal capacity.” (Citation omitted.) Siegrist v. Herhold, 365 Ga. … “Under Georgia law, official or qualified immunity is an entitlement not to stand trial rather than a mere defense to liability.
Cited 0 timesPublishedErskine 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.
Cited 16 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 20, 2024
violated his Fourth Amendment right or that they violated a clearly established right. … Davis, 878 F.3d 226, 234 (7th Cir. 2017) (finding that case that was decided four months after events in question could not clearly establish any rights for the purposes of qualified immunity); Reynolds v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownChatman v. Ft. Lauderdale Police Department
688 F. App'x 870 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 6, 2016
to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … ANALYSIS On appeal, Deputy Wengert does not argue that Chatman’s right to be free from a prolonged dog bite after surrender was not clearly established under federal law.
Cited 0 timesPublished458 Mass. 1007 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 14, 2010
The court did not expressly address the qualified immunity issue. Id. The defendant appealed. Id. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit did not reach the qualified immunity issue as to the first set of claims. 7 Id. at 303-304 . … He may, as we twice clearly indicated in McMenimen I, pursue the immunity issues as a matter of right in *1010 his direct appeal. Id. at 187 & 193 n.13, citing Littles, supra at 880 .
Cited 7 timesPublishedHare v. City of Corinth, Miss.
74 F.3d 633 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 10, 1994
Clearly Established Constitutional Injury In reviewing the denial of a summary judgment motion based on a claim of qualified immunity, the Supreme Court has taught that the first inquiry is whether the plaintiff … at all' before reaching the possibly unnecessary question of whether the plaintiff asserted a violation of a "clearly established' right."). 5 To be clearly established, the
Cited 3 timesPublishedOONA 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.
Cited 17 timesPublishedKyle 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.
Cited 39 timesPublished173 F.3d 1068 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 6, 1999
the alleged right is clearly established; and (3) raise a genuine issue of fact as to whether the official would have known that his alleged conduct would have violated [the] plaintiff's clearly established right. 14 Habiger … Both of these claims allege violations of constitutional rights that were clearly established at the time of the August 12 arrest. See Guite v.
Cited 8 timesPublished215 F.3d 367 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 9, 2000
Wright argues that the Appellants’ qualified immunity claims are not reviewable on interlocutory appeal because the District Court’s December 18, 1998, Memorandum and Order “sets forth the clearly established right which … Holding as we do that Wright has alleged the violation of a clearly established right, we must also hold that the Appellants are not entitled to qualified immunity at this stage of the proceedings. IV.
Cited 1 timesPublishedJarovits v. Monroe County Children & Youth Services
345 F. App'x 784 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 21, 2009
The Bayer Court held that “under the ‘clearly established’ prong of the Saucier test, defendants should be afforded qualified immunity with respect to [the plaintiffs’ procedural due process] claim.” … qualified immunity.
Cited 1 timesPublished13 F.3d 791 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 6, 1994
Government officials have qualified immunity for discretionary functions so long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Stroud Because of the nature of § 1983 supervisory liability, the plaintiffs must make several separate showings to demonstrate that Stroud lacked qualified immunity: (1) it was “clearly established” at the time of Morris
Cited 1,828 timesPublishedHlad 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.
Cited 0 timesPublishedRobinson v. City of West Allis
239 Wis. 2d 595 · Wisconsin Supreme Court · Dec 13, 2000
When faced with the defense of qualified immunity the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that a defendant's conduct violated " 'clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … While it is clearly established that an individual has a right to be free from excessive force, our qualified immunity inquiry must be much more particularized as to the facts of each case. Anderson v.
Cited 31 timesPublished
Ask Donna