Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersAR1841

4,882 results

0.46s

  • Matthews v. Martin

    280 Ark. 345 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 10, 1983

    The legislature promptly enacted Act 165 of 1969 reinstating municipal immunity to tort liability as a matter of public policy. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 12-2901 (Repl. 1979). In Hardin v. … The immunity granted to municipalities extends to the city’s officials and employees. Jones v. Sewer Improvement District No. 3, 119 Ark. 166 , 177 S.W. 888 (1915). Affirmed.

    Cited 52 timesPublished
  • City of Farmington v. Smith

    366 Ark. 473 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 1, 2006

    were violative of a clearly established law. … they knew their actions violated any clearly established laws.

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • Opinion No.

    Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jun 23, 1994

    immunity in federal court. … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (1987) (stating that the 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 timesPublished
  • Opinion No.

    Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Apr 8, 2004

    Martin, 280 Ark. 345 , 658 S.W.2d 374 (1983) (holding that qualified immunity will not apply if the challenged conduct violates clearly established law that a reasonable person would have known). … However, because negligence is a state, not a federal, claim, your question does not raise any issue of qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Howard v. Fisk

    District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 18, 2020

    Thus, the Court must conclude that Fisk is entitled to qualified immunity and dismiss all individual capacity claims against her. See Estate of Walker v. … Wallace, 881 F.3d 1056, 1060 (8th Cir. 2018) (“An individual is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”)

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Heslip v. Lobbs

    554 F. Supp. 694 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Dec 7, 1982

    Rather than pass on the defendants’ qualified immunity claim, the Supreme Court reshaped the contours of the qualified immunity standard, and remanded the case to the Court of Appeals. 3 In numerous cases, cited supra, courts … In essence, the qualified immunity defense attempts to accommodate these competing social goals. The Harlow opinion suggests that evolving standards for qualified immunity had rendered the defense negligible in effect.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Keesee v. Johnson

    District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 19, 2024

    Burrows is also entitled to qualified immunity because his acts were authorized by a court order and thus did not violate Keesee’s clearly established statutory rights. See Frierson v. Goetz, 227 F. … Louis, 39 F.4th 494, 507 (8th Cir. 2022) (reversing denial of qualified immunity “because it is not clearly established that the intracorporate conspiracy doctrine does not apply to § 1983 conspiracy claims”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Levine v. City of Eureka Springs, Arkansas

    District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 29, 2017

    Featherstone are each entitled to qualified immunity from Mr. Levine’s claims against them in their individual capacities. See Pearson v. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009) (“Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Fegans v. Norris

    351 Ark. 200 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 21, 2002

    A motion for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity is precluded only when the plaintiff has asserted a constitutional violation, demonstrated the constitutional right is clearly established and raised a genuine issue … The appellee officials are immune from suit in this action because they did not violate clearly established principles of law of which a reasonable person would have knowledge.

    Cited 47 timesPublished
  • Brown

    District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 2, 2026

    Ernst, 933 F.3d 975, 979 (8th Cir. 2019); Morgan, 920 F.3d at 523 (in determining whether an officer has qualified immunity, courts must answer whether the officer violated a clearly established right). … For all of these reasons, Brown did not violate Nelson’s clearly established rights.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Estate of De'Angelo Brown v. West

    District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 30, 2022

    Andrews, 972 F.3d 1007 (8th Cir. 2020) (examining when a right is clearly established for qualified immunity analysis). Moore, 514 F.3d at 760. … Andrews, 972 F.3d 1007 (8th Cir. 2020) (examining when a right is clearly established for qualified immunity analysis).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Robinson v. Beaumont

    291 Ark. 477 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 16, 1987

    This immunity is guaranteed so long as the actions do not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … If the complaint fails to state a claim of violation of clearly established law the defense of qualified immunity is appropriate and the suit should not be allowed to proceed.

    Cited 55 timesPublished
  • Johnson v. Wilfong

    District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Aug 19, 2025

    Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person [in their positions … State Univ., 495 F.3d 591, 594 (8th Cir. 2007) (“Although the defendant bears the burden of proof for this affirmative defense [of qualified immunity], the plaintiff must demonstrate that the law was clearly established

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Barrows v. Collins

    District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 15, 2019

    Qualified Immunity The Court need not engage in a qualified-immunity analysis in this case, as it already found that none of Barrows’s claims amount to the deprivation of a constitutional right. … McNeese, 675 F.3d 1158, 1161 (8th Cir. 2012) (explaining that an official may be entitled to qualified immunity if the facts show that the plaintiff has been deprived of a constitutional right and that the right was clearly

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Baldridge v. Cordes

    350 Ark. 114 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 26, 2002

    Qualified Immunity A motion for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity is precluded only when the plaintiff has asserted a constitutional violation, demonstrated the constitutional right is clearly established and … Thus, an official is immune from suit if his actions did not violate clearly established principles of law of which a reasonable person would have knowledge. Virden v.

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • Blevins v. Hudson

    489 S.W.3d 165 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 7, 2016

    Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages when they are performing discretionary functions “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Thus, courts evaluating a claim of qualified immunity must determine whether the-plaintiff has alleged the deprivation of an actual constitutional right and, if so, whether that right was clearly established at the time of

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Banks v. Jones

    575 S.W.3d 111 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 6, 2019

    Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity from damages under Section 1983 unless they transgress "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … Banks is entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the facts alleged, construed in a light most favorable to Jones, establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) the right was clearly established at

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • City of Fayetteville v. Romine

    373 Ark. 318 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 1, 2008

    violation, demonstrated the constitutional right is clearly established, and raised a genuine issue of fact as to whether the official would have known that the conduct violated that clearly established right. … his conduct violated that clearly established right.

    Cited 33 timesPublished
  • Sullivan v. Coney

    427 S.W.3d 682 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 23, 2013

    right is clearly established, and (3) raised a genuine issue of fact as to whether the official would have known that the conduct violated that clearly established right. … that his conduct violated that clearly established right.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Boyle Ventures, LLC v. City of Fayetteville

    711 S.W.3d 280 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 15, 2025

    “A motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity is precluded only when the plaintiff has asserted a constitutional violation, demonstrated the constitutional right is clearly established and raised a genuine … 21 would have known that the conduct violated that clearly established right.

    Cited 5 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.