Sarasota, Inc. v. Moceri

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that discovery was not permitted before a ruling on qualified immunity or a finding that the court cannot rule without limited discovery
• instructing district courts that, “[w]here public officials assert qualified immunity in a motion to dismiss, [they] must rule on the motion” and “may not permit discovery against the immunity-asserting defendants before [ruling] on their defense” (citation omitted
• first citing Backe v. LeBlanc, 691 F.3d 645, 647–49 (5th Cir. 2012); then citing Mitchell, 472 U.S. at 526–27
• “None of this means, of course, that the QI determination must be made once- and-for-all at the motion-to-dismiss stage.”
• “The Supreme Court has now made clear that a plaintiff asserting constitutional claims against an officer claiming QI must survive the motion to dismiss without any discovery.”
• “[T]he defendant can move the district court for discovery limited to the factual dispute relevant to whether QI applies, then reassert QI in a summary judgment motion.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).