Case law

Ross v. State of Alabama

15 F. Supp. 2d 1173 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Jul 22, 1998

Pleading with specificity is particularly important where, as here, a defendant asserts the defense of qualified immunity, and the court must decide whether the conduct complained of violates a “clearly established” constitutional … As Defendants correctly note, the Supreme Court has stated that, “[ujnless the plaintiff's allegation states a claim of violation of a clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal

Duckett v. Oklahoma ex rel. Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma

986 F. Supp. 2d 1249 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 14, 2013

Qualified Immunity The defense of qualified immunity protects a public employee from personal liability under § 1983 unless he violated a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of his conduct in the … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 , 129 S.Ct. 808 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009). “ ‘In order for the law to be clearly established, there must be a Supreme Court or Tenth Circuit decision on point, or the clearly established weight

Dear v. City of Irving

902 S.W.2d 731 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 16, 1995

“This immunity, variously known as governmental, official, quasi-judicial or qualified immunity, evolved out of a public policy that encourages public officers to carry out their duties without fear of personal liability. … Under federal law, the defense of qualified immunity applies only if the officer’s actions involved the exercise of discretionary duties. See Streetman v. Jordan, 918 F.2d 555, 556 (5th Cir.1990).

Wadith Nader v. City of Papillion

917 F.3d 1055 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 8, 2019

On that claim, the district court found: (1) Svajgl and Iversen were entitled to qualified immunity; (2) Hessig was entitled to either absolute immunity or qualified immunity; (3) Lyons and Polikov were entitled to qualified … “An official is entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, establishes a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) the right was clearly established

Ford v. Anderson County

102 F.4th 292 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 22, 2024

of qualified immunity. … This court’s unpublished opinions cannot clearly establish the law for the purposes of qualified immunity, but they nevertheless may “aptly illustrate[] the established right.” Cooper v.

James E. Duncan, Cross-Appellee v. Mr. & Mrs. Harold Peck, Cross-Appellants, Highland Coal & Chemical Corporation

844 F.2d 1261 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 25, 1988

Harlow made clear that this is an objective test, and that if the right was not clearly established, the defendant is entitled to immunity, and the court should dismiss the case without further discovery. 6 Yet the underlying … Clearly, the important policy reasons for granting immunity from suit to government officials would not extend to private parties, who can be adequately protected from liability by merely establishing an affirmative good

Jackson County Drain Commissioner v. Village of Stockbridge

270 Mich. App. 273 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 24, 2006

Drains extending into more than 1 county or affecting lands in more than 1 county, shall be established and constructed in accordance with the provisions of this act regulating the establishment and construction of drains … Instead, the Court clearly stated that MCL 691.1407 did not permit a trespass-nuisance exception to governmental immunity. Pohutski, supra at 678-679 . In doing so, the Court relied on the plain meaning of the statute.

Sledd v. Lindsay

864 F. Supp. 819 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 30, 1994

It is a well settled tenet that under the judicially created doctrine of qualified immunity, public officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from civil damages unless their conduct violates a clearly established … “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials ... from damages unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” Elder v.

Sparing v. Village of Olympia Fields

77 F. Supp. 2d 891 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 13, 1999

Although qualified immunity is a defense, the plaintiff has the burden of establishing that the defendant violated a clearly established constitutional right. See Spiegel, 196 F.3d 717, 722 . 2. … If a § 1983 plaintiff establishes a constitutional violation, the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, unless the plaintiff also demonstrates that the law “was so ‘clearly established’ that ‘a reasonable official

Corbett v. Transportation Security Administration

968 F. Supp. 2d 1171 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 16, 2012

Chamizo finally argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity, as Plaintiff’s allegations fail to establish any violation of a clearly established constitutional right. (Id. at 5-15.) … In the Eleventh Circuit, “the law can be ‘clearly established’ for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S.

Glass v. Mayas

984 F.2d 55 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 15, 1993

Due Process Qualified immunity protects government officials from the “costs of trial” and “broad reaching discovery” by shielding them from liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.”

Thomas v. Devries

834 F. Supp. 398 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Oct 19, 1993

Suits against state employees in their individual capacities may be subject to qualified or good faith immunity, and such defendants are shielded from liability insofar as their conduct does not violate “ ‘clearly established … Busby also preserves qualified immunity when there is no violation of a clearly defined property interests associated with substantive due process, and in the present ease there is no clearly defined property interest that

Szuch v. FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co.

2016 Ohio 620 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 19, 2016

Nuisance may be further divided into “absolute” and “qualified.” … . {¶ 54} Alternatively, appellants argue that the operation of the range above the noise regulations is evidence of negligence sufficient to establish a qualified nuisance.

Richard v. Perkins

373 F. Supp. 2d 1211 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jun 13, 2005

Qualified immunity provides government officials immunity from suit as well as from liability for their discretionary acts. See Mitchell v. … the *1217 non-renewal of his scholarship was not clearly established.

Jiménez-González v. Alvarez-Rubio

683 F. Supp. 2d 177 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Feb 8, 2010

The qualified immunity doctrine shields public officials from civil suits as long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … The second “clearly established” step of the qualified immunity analysis has two aspects. Id. One aspect focuses on “the clarity of the law at the time of the alleged civil rights violation.” Id.

Shirley Mello Rodriques v. Joseph Furtado

950 F.2d 805 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Dec 5, 1991

Qualified Immunity We turn next to appellee Furtado’s defense of qualified immunity. … In assessing the Supreme Court’s rulings regarding qualified immunity in Harlow and Anderson, see note 3 supra, this court has established the applicable standard of qualified immunity for police officers conducting arrests

Tungwarara v. United States

400 F. Supp. 2d 1213 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 13, 2005

The defense of qualified immunity protects “government officials ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … On the uncontested facts of the search here, however, Ludwigs is entitled to qualified immunity. C. Plaintiffs Fifth Amendment Right To Equal Protection Was Not Clearly Established In 2002.

Magro v. City of Vineland

148 N.J. Super. 34 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 9, 1977

The undisputed facts establish that the nature of the lands herein as rural, undeveloped and unimproved, and the use thereof by plaintiff for swimming qualify to bring into play the immunity granted by the statute, as construed … The statute grants immunity to a landowner under the facts herein — an immunity equally available to a public entity and a private individual or corporation. Affirmed.

Riley v. City of Montgomery, AL

104 F.3d 1247 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 30, 1997

Accordingly, Wooten is entitled to no immunity for such claims. … The Grant of Summary Judgment to City Defendants Though the district court's opinion largely speaks in terms of qualified immunity, the district court did conclude, in its summary judgment order, that no constitutional

Furnace v. Oklahoma Corp. Commission

51 F.3d 932 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 6, 1995

clearly established when the violation occurred.” … Once the magistrate judge determined that the law was not clearly established, Johnson was entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity.