context: This Court's initial inquiry as to each count of the complaint, therefore, is whether Plaintiff has "alleged the deprivation of a right that either federal law or the Constitution protects." A violation of state law does not, in itself, give rise to a SS 1983 claim.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 821 F.2d 913, 922
citation_a.parenthetical: violation of state law neither gives plaintiff a Section 1983 claim nor deprives defendants of the defense of qualified immunity
citation_a.sentence: See, e.g., Robison v. Via, 821 F.2d 913, 922 (2d Cir.1987) (violation of state law neither gives plaintiff a Section 1983 claim nor deprives defendants of the defense of qualified immunity); see also Davis v. Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 197 & n. 11, 104 S.Ct. 3012, 82 L.Ed.2d 139 (1984) (an official does not lose qualified immunity if her conduct violated clearly established state law where the conduct did not violate clearly established federally protected rights).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.parenthetical: an official does not lose qualified immunity if her conduct violated clearly established state law where the conduct did not violate clearly established federally protected rights
citation_b.sentence: See, e.g., Robison v. Via, 821 F.2d 913, 922 (2d Cir.1987) (violation of state law neither gives plaintiff a Section 1983 claim nor deprives defendants of the defense of qualified immunity); see also Davis v. Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 197 & n. 11, 104 S.Ct. 3012, 82 L.Ed.2d 139 (1984) (an official does not lose qualified immunity if her conduct violated clearly established state law where the conduct did not violate clearly established federally protected rights).