Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersTX1851

10,000+ results

0.58s

  • Escobar v. Harris County

    442 S.W.3d 621 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 31, 2014

    Clearly established law and qualified immunity After Deputy Goodney raised the affirmative defense of qualified immunity, the burden of persuasion fell on Escobar to negate the defense. See Thomas, 263 S.W.3d at 219 . … If he did, then the clearly established law permits the use of deadly force. If he didn’t, then the clearly established law prohibits it.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Sergeant Mary Haver and Deputy Constable Kevin Vailes, in Their Individually Capacities v. Barbara Coats

    491 S.W.3d 877 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 12, 2016

    A no-evidence motion cannot be used to obtain summary judgment establishing the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … raise the qualified immunity defense by doing nothing more than pleading in good faith that qualified immunity applies.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Surratt v. McClaran

    234 F. Supp. 3d 815 · District Court, E.D. Texas · Mar 3, 2016

    Qualified Immunity: Section 1983 Claims against Individual Defendants in their Individual Capacities Defendants argue that Caver, Stevens, and McClaran are entitled to qualified immunity from Section 1983 claims brought against … “Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’”

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Brown v. City of Hous.

    297 F. Supp. 3d 748 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Dec 26, 2017

    "To be 'clearly established' for purposes of qualified immunity, 'the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.' " Id. … "Thus, Mitchell clearly establishes that an order rejecting the defense of qualified immunity at either the dismissal stage or the summary judgment stage is a 'final' judgment subject to immediate appeal."

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Jaso v. Travis County Juvenile Board

    6 S.W.3d 324 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Nov 4, 1999

    University of Mississippi, the Fifth Circuit emphasized that a fact-finder can infer pretext if it finds that the employee was clearly better qualified (as opposed to merely better or as qualified). … Jaso does not claim to have been clearly better qualified than Medina for the position of chief. The Board argues that this is the only way to establish a pretext for age-discrimination. We disagree.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Daniel J. Peterson, D/B/A Chiarello Investments, D/B/A Home Equity lending.com v. County Line, Inc. James Houchins and Greg A. Weithoner

    Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 7, 2008

    He asserted that Hayes-Pupko had to overcome his assertion of qualified immunity by proving that he (1) violated her clearly established rights and (2) acted unreasonably or in bad faith in doing so. … Discussion “A government official performing discretionary functions is entitled to qualified immunity unless his conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Arlington Professional Fire Fighters International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, Local 1329 David Crow, Shawn Graham, Joseph Markham, Edward Montague, Matthew Throne, and Adrian Rojas v. City of Arlington, Texas City of Arlington, Texas, City Council City of Arlington, Texas, Civil Service Commission Jim Ross, in His Official Capacity as Mayor of the City of Arlington Helen Moise, in Her Official Capacity as a Member of the City of Arlington, Texas, City Council Ralph Gonzalez, in His Official Capacity as a Member of the City of Arlington, Texas, City Council Nikkie Hunter, in Her Official Capacity as a Member of the City of Arlington, Texas, City Council

    Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) · Sep 16, 2021

    It is not clearly established whether Burlington’s “materially adverse” standard applies to retaliation for protected speech. See Gibson . . . , 734 F.3d [at] 401 n.4 . . . … Saunders, 588 F.3d 282, 288 (5th Cir. 2009) (finding that the application of Burlington to First Amendment retaliation is not “clearly established”)[, abrogated on other grounds by Sims v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Harris, Roderick

    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 25, 2016

    App. 2013) (explaining that an “issue of first impression can sometimes qualify” for extraordinary relief “when the factual scenario has never been precisely addressed but the principle of law has been clearly established

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • McIntosh Ex Rel. Estate of McIntosh v. Smith

    690 F. Supp. 2d 515 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 2, 2010

    Qualified Immunity “[government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages [by qualified immunity] insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … and the then clearly established law.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Mallett Jr. v. Goines

    District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 22, 2021

    This second prong of the qualified immunity analysis involves “two separate inquiries: whether the allegedly violated constitutional rights were clearly established at the time of the incident; and, if so, whether the conduct … City of Arlington, Texas, 16 F.4th 1159 (Sth Cir. 2021) (affirming the dismissal of claims based on qualified immunity when “the plaintiffs failed to identify any clearly established law that would place beyond doubt the

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Patterson v. Oakes

    District Court, E.D. Texas · Mar 30, 2023

    immunity without first addressing whether the violation of the right alleged was clearly established. … In their qualified immunity argument, Defendants assert that Plaintiff has not set out a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Thomas v. Bracey

    940 S.W.2d 340 · Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · Feb 12, 1997

    To grant immunity short of absolute privilege to communications relating to pending or proposed litigation, and thus subject an attorney to liability for defamation, might tend to lessen an attorney’s efforts on behalf of … The letter was clearly written in an effort to secure the rights of appellee’s client, the executor of the estate, in property and income belonging to the estate.

    Cited 36 timesPublished
  • Ramirez v. Escajeda

    District Court, W.D. Texas · May 31, 2022

    ’s conduct was, “as a matter of law,” “objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law,” Cantrell, 666 F.3d at 921; Kinney v. … Bay City, Tex., 227 F.3d 316, 320–24 (5th Cir. 2000) (addressing whether there was clearly-established law). But see Colston v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Ex Parte Juan Antonio Molina Valencia v. .

    Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · Apr 17, 2024

    App. 2013) (“[A]n issue of first impression can sometimes qualify for mandamus relief when the factual scenario has never been precisely addressed but the principle of law has been clearly established.”). … ); Weeks, 391 S.W.3d at 122 (holding mandamus relief is available if “the principle of law has been clearly established”).

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Hunter v. Smith

    District Court, E.D. Texas · Aug 14, 2025

    As plaintiff failed to present competent summary-judgment evidence showing that defendants violated a clearly established constitutional right, the magistrate judge found that defendants were entitled to qualified … Fite, 47 F.4th 402, 408 (5th Cir. 2022) (granting qualified immunity when plaintiff “fails to iden- tify a single case to support” a clearly established right (quotation marks omitted)).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Dan Turner and Henry Bonaparte v. Troy Perry

    Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Jan 27, 2009

    Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects governmental officials performing discretionary functions from suit if their actions were objectively reasonable in the light of then clearly-established law. Anderson v. … Appellants contend that they nevertheless are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate a clearly established right protecting Perry = s speech.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Geils v. Patin

    941 F. Supp. 2d 722 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 25, 2012

    Qualified Immunity Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … The clearly established requirement “does not mean that officials’ conduct is protected by qualified immunity unless the very action in question has previously been held unlawful.” Cantrell v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Service Employment Redevelopment v. Fort Worth Independent School District

    Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) · Mar 3, 2005

    code did not clearly and unambiguously waive school district’s immunity from suit); City of Dallas v. … provides the “requisite clarity to establish a waiver of immunity from suit”). 8: San Antonio ISD , 2004 WL 2450919 , at *2-3 (mem. op.)

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Rohan for Rohan v. Exxon Corp.

    896 F. Supp. 666 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 7, 1995

    Thus, DOHSA clearly supplies the applicable law in this wrongful death case. In Miles v. … The same analysis applies to claims for mental anguish, which are clearly non-pecuniary in nature.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Service Employment Redevelopment v. Fort Worth Independent School District

    Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) · Mar 3, 2005

    code did not clearly and unambiguously waive school district’s immunity from suit); City of Dallas v. … provides the “requisite clarity to establish a waiver of immunity from suit”). 8.

    Cited 0 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.