Case law

William Dale Elliott v. Officer Richard B. Wilcox

641 F. App'x 893 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 14, 2016

To overcome qualified immunity, Elliott must establish (1) that the defendants violated his constitutional rights and (2) that “the law clearly established those rights at the time of the alleged misconduct.” … Bentley and Tanner are entitled to qualified immunity unless Elliott can show that “the law clearly established that [the] particular amount of force” they used was excessive. Lee, 284 F.3d at 1198.

United States v. Jerry Lee Harvey

848 F.2d 1547 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 14, 1988

The government has an obligation to clearly define the parameters of any grant of immunity it extends to a person who in exchange agrees to provide information or testimony the government desires. … A Kastigar hearing is triggered once a defendant establishes that he provided the government with information or testimony under a grant of immunity.

Taylor v. Singletary

148 F.3d 1276 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 5, 1998

to the extent established in the agreement itself. … He clearly did not take the stand in the Bancoshares trial involuntarily, and we believe the following excerpt from the state court's pre-Kastigar hearing establishes that Taylor did not involuntarily enter the immunity

United States v. Douglas Nyhuis, United States of America v. Anicia Marivel Ripoll, A/K/A Anicia Goodman

8 F.3d 731 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 2, 1993

Our review of a Kastigar claim is a deferential one and “we must affirm the district court’s Kastigar decision unless it is clearly erroneous.” United States v. … Based on this record, we conclude that the district court’s denial of Nyhuis’s Kasti- gw-based motion to dismiss was not clearly erroneous. III.

Hammond v. Hall

586 F.3d 1289 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 4, 2009

established federal law.” … [I]t restricts the source of clearly established law to this Court’s jurisprudence.”); accord Carey v. Musladin, 549 U.S. 70, 74, 127 S.

Weissman v. National Ass'n of Securities Dealers, Inc.

500 F.3d 1293 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 18, 2007

First, I see nothing in Leatherman to suggest that the limitation on heightened pleading was premised on the availability of qualified immunity in particular as a defense. … Second, the decision of the Fifth Circuit cited by the Leatherman Court as having established the heightened pleading rule at issue was itself an absolute immunity case against individual government officers; as the Court

Calvin Bowman v. Birmingham, City Of

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 19, 2019

immunity, which generally shields government officials from suit based on discretionary functions, unless their conduct violated clearly established federal statutory or constitutional rights. … In the district court’s view, Moore and Patton would continue to enjoy qualified immunity because their alleged § 1981 violations—if any—did not involve “a clearly established right in light of the specific context of

United States v. Wilfrid Lazarre

14 F.3d 580 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 22, 1994

And it is sufficient to qualify him as a person occupying a sensitive position and trigger the enhancement. Cf. Harrington v. … United States, 748 F.Supp. 919, 931 (D.P.R.1990) (finding an INS district director, whose discretion to grant parole visas was guided by general regulatory considerations, was immune from suit under the Federal Tort Claims

Frances McCarthney v. Griffin-Spalding County Board of Education

791 F.2d 1549 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 25, 1986

Although failure to hire the most qualified applicant may be circumstantial evidence of discrimination, standing alone it does not render the district court's decision to credit Dr. Green’s testimony clearly erroneous. … This unpublicized use of recommendations, standing by itself or considered with the alleged failure to hire the most qualified person, does not make the district court’s credibility determination clearly erroneous.

Venus Jones v. J. Walsh

711 F. App'x 504 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 29, 2017

Officers “enjoy a qualified immunity from suit that protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … The officers also are entitled to qualified immunity from Jones’s claim of excessive force.

Terry Coley v. Luther Smith

441 F. App'x 627 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 23, 2011

To overcome Defendants’ qualified-immunity defense, Plaintiff bears the burden of showing both that Defendants’ conduct amounted to a constitutional violation and that the right violated was already “clearly established … Plaintiff has therefore failed to meet his burden of showing a clearly established right; he cannot overcome Defendants’ qualified immunity.

Laura Valentine v. Sheriff Joel Robinson

601 F. App'x 778 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 30, 2015

“Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly 5  Case: 14 … Wilson, 311 F.3d at 1346 (government officials acting within the scope of their discretionary authority are immune from individual civil liability if the officials’ conduct violates no “clearly established statutory or constitutional

Leggett v. Badger

759 F.2d 1556 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 13, 1985

The record clearly shows that attorney’s fees were incurred in an effort to recover damages under § 1983. … The district court’s finding that there was no causal connection between Leggett’s action and the new “use of force” training program was not clearly erroneous. See Fields v.

Dan Edward Routly, Cross-Appellee v. Harry K. Singletary, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

33 F.3d 1279 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 19, 1994

5 Furthermore, counsel made reference to this immunity on more than one occasion during trial. … Moreover, counsel cross-examined O’Brien concerning the immunity agreement at trial.

Goffer v. Marbury

956 F.2d 1045 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 27, 1992

immunity. … His subjective belief about the correctness of the entry was not relevant in determining whether he enjoyed qualified immunity. Herron v. Bowyer, 850 F.2d 1543, 1546 (11th Cir.1988).

Justin Shuford v. R.L. Butch Conway

666 F. App'x 811 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 18, 2016

The district court found that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. … “In this circuit, the law can be ‘clearly established’ for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S.

Joy Laskar, Ph.D. v. G.P. "Bud" Peterson

771 F.3d 1291 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 13, 2014

Third and finally, Appellees advanced an argument for qualified immunity. … Because we find that the district court properly dismissed Laskar’s complaint, we need not address the issue of qualified immunity.

Whittier Ex Rel. Estate of Diotaiuto v. Goldstein

343 F. App'x 517 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 31, 2009

DISCUSSION “Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from suits in their individual capacities unless their conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional … “To overcome qualified immunity, the plaintiff must satisfy a two prong test; he must show that: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) this right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation

Carlos Zelaya v. United States

781 F.3d 1315 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 30, 2015

to its constitutional immunity from suit.”). … See 15 U.S.C. § 78d.13 Its regulation of the securities markets clearly involves the kinds of decisions “we would expect inherently to be grounded in considerations of policy.”

Robert Craig Wells v. Norman C. Cramer

262 F. App'x 184 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 11, 2008

Qualified immunity completely protects government officials performing discretionary functions from suit in their individual capacities unless their conduct violates “‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … If a constitutional violation is alleged, the final step of the qualified immunity analysis is whether the right was clearly established. Id.