Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 13 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Gross v. Pirtle.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gross v. Pirtle Anchor | green | “courts recognize the affirmative defense of qualified immunity, which protects 'all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” | 5 |
| 2 | Trotter v. The Regents Of The University Of New Mexico | green | “must demonstrate a substantial correspondence between the conduct in question and prior law allegedly establishing that the defendant's actions were clearly prohibited.” | 4 |
| 3 | Roska v. Peterson | green | “in considering the 'objective legal reasonableness' of the state officer's actions, one relevant factor is whether the defendant relied on a state statute, regulation, or official policy that explicitly sanctioned the conduct in question.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.