Case law

Strope v. Collins

492 F. Supp. 2d 1289 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jun 15, 2007

Qualified Immunity on Individual Capacity Claims Generally, government officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability for civil damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory … Accordingly, the current summary judgment record does not establish, at least at this procedural juncture, that defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.

Timberlake by Timberlake v. Benton

786 F. Supp. 676 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Jan 29, 1992

Qualified Immunity Public officials enjoy a qualified immunity from liability in lawsuits brought under § 1983. Immunity, based upon an objective reasonableness standard, was established in Harlow v. … was so clearly in violation of constitutional law that he is unprotected by qualified immunity.

N.E., as Legal Guardian for Infant J v. v. State of

449 N.J. Super. 379 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 4, 2017

Objective reasonableness will be established if the actor's conduct did not violate a clearly established constitutional or statutory right. Gormley v. … A defendant who cannot establish that his or her conduct was objectively reasonable may still invoke qualified immunity if his or her actions were carried out in good faith.

Linda K. Wood v. Steven C. Ostrander Neil Maloney

879 F.2d 583 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 27, 1989

Qualified, Immunity State officials cannot be held liable for damages under section 1983 unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right. Davis v. … away clearly established law.

Dejesus v. Village of Pelham Manor

282 F. Supp. 2d 162 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 17, 2003

“Clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity means that the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.” Wilson v. … established federal law to rebut the defense of qualified immunity.

Sims v. Metropolitan Dade County

972 F.2d 1230 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 18, 1992

actions violated clearly established rights. … Assuming the facts as Sims alleged them for the purposes of qualified immunity, the county officials' actions violated clearly established law and they are not entitled to qualified immunity. * Honorable Bailey Brown, Senior

Calloway v. Boro of Glassboro Department of Police

89 F. Supp. 2d 543 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 8, 2000

It is well-established that under the doctrine of qualified immunity: Government officials performing discretionary functions are “shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as then-conduct does not violate clearly … Under the circumstances of this case, I find that the law at the time of the allegedly discriminatory conduct was not clearly established and therefore, Best, Massari, and Powell are entitled to qualified immunity. c. § 1983

Vincent v. City of Sulphur

28 F. Supp. 3d 626 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · May 15, 2014

Thus, the second prong of the qualified immunity test, whether the right was clearly established at the time, must be considered. … for the purpose of establishing qualified immunity.

Pate v. United States

277 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 23, 2003

Second, regarding defendant Quick’s claims of absolute immunity, plaintiff argues that immunity is only warranted where officials “can prove that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … When determining whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, courts must ask whether the official engaged in conduct that violated the clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of a person of which

Abbott v. Village of Winthrop Harbor

953 F. Supp. 931 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 13, 1996

Qualified Immunity: Counts 9, 11, & 18 Defendant Miller asserts the affirmative defense of qualified immunity against each and every named plaintiff as to count 9, which alleges violations of Title III, and count 11, which … . *936 1996), in which the court summarily held that defendants have the burden of establishing the defense of qualified immunity at trial. Id. at 123 .

Schwab v. Wood

767 F. Supp. 574 · District Court, D. Delaware · Jun 12, 1991

Qualified Immunity A. … Standard for Qualified Immunity State officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which

Figueroa v. Fernandez

921 F. Supp. 889 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Mar 15, 1996

Naturally, Plaintiffs must assert a violation of a clearly established constitutional right before they can even begin to defeat the Mayor’s motion for qualified immunity. Siegert v. … In addition, Plaintiffs’ compensatory damage claims against the Mayor fail to allege a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. On these claims, the Mayor is protected by qualified immunity.

Bertolis v. Community Unit School District No. 7

283 Ill. App. 3d 874 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 3, 1996

On July 20, 1994, defendants filed a motion to dismiss, citing as one ground for dismissal section 8—101 of the Tort Immunity Act, which establishes a one-year limitation period for actions commenced against local public … Although the Tort Immunity Act clearly establishes a one-year limitation period for actions filed against local public entities, in addition to following the statute of limitations applicable to an action, we must also follow

Gallardo v. DiCarlo

203 F. Supp. 2d 1160 · District Court, C.D. California · May 13, 2002

Qualified Immunity DiCarlo asserts that she is entitled to dismissal of the FAC on the grounds of qualified immunity. 11 In Section 1983 claims, the doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damage … She is not entitled to qualified immunity based on the allegations in the FAC. D.

Linares v. Jones

551 F. Supp. 2d 12 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 28, 2008

“If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct.” … Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818-19 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 . “ ‘[Clearly established’ for purposes of qualified immunity means that ‘[t]he contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that

Laquarius Gray v. Antonio Bostic

458 F.3d 1295 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 7, 2006

Qualified Immunity Principles “Qualified immunity offers a complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … The Supreme Court has established a two-part test to evaluate whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity.

Gonzalez Perez v. Gomez Aguila

312 F. Supp. 2d 161 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Apr 7, 2004

could not have believed that they were violating such clearly established constitutional rights. … complains violated clearly established law.”

Huron Valley Hospital, Inc. v. City Of Pontiac

792 F.2d 563 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 30, 1986

This is not a simple conclusion that the law is clearly established as is necessary with qualified immunity. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), test for applying qualified immunity requires a finding that the official conduct "does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Jenkins v. Talladega City Board Of Education

95 F.3d 1036 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 16, 1996

Thus, the basic principles of qualified immunity doctrine remain unchanged. 22 The confusion over qualified immunity is exemplified by defendants' apparent assumption that relevant law can be "clearly established" only when … establish the law in this case for qualified immunity purposes.

Hargrove v. Riley

100 F. Supp. 2d 1271 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Apr 19, 2000

Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions “[f]rom liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Riley is not entitled to qualified immunity because she failed to establish that her conduct was reasonable notwithstanding the existence of clearly established law.