Case law

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).

Timothy Council v. Dave Sutton

366 F. App'x 31 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 12, 2010

Additionally, the Deputies argue that they were entitled to qualified immunity on their motion for summary judgment because they did not violate Council’s clearly established rights. … Therefore, we have jurisdiction to review the denial of qualified immunity because the Deputies challenge that the law was not clearly established, which is a question of law.

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

Estate of Bearden Ex Rel. Bearden v. Anglin

543 F. App'x 918 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 29, 2013

DISCUSSION “Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials acting within their discretionary authority are immune from suit unless the official’s conduct violates clearly established federal statutory … by admissible evidence, must demonstrate both (1) a constitutional violation and (2) that the violation was clearly established.

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.

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

Shirlie D. Green v. Sheriff Jacquelyn H. Barrett

226 F. App'x 883 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 14, 2007

Second, if a constitutional right was violated under the plaintiff's version of the facts, we must then determine “whether the right was clearly established.” Id. … When Green gave her testimony, she was not, as a matter of law, exercising a clearly established First Amendment right.

Parker v. Williams

855 F.2d 763 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 20, 1988

Sheriff Amerson misapprehends the nature of qualified immunity for section 1983 claims against individuals. 36 Harlow v. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), adopted a purely objective standard of qualified immunity.

Betty Williams v. Q.D. Hudson

602 F. App'x 769 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 11, 2015

those rights were “clearly established” at the time of the incident. … However, clearly established law may differ from state to state. See Courson v.

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.

United States v. Clifford B. Gandy, Jr.

917 F.3d 1333 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 6, 2019

And we held that if Shepard documents establish that a defendant was convicted of the "striking" element as opposed to the "touching" element of simple battery, then the conviction qualifies as a predicate "violent felony … As a result, we may conclude that Gandy was convicted of a qualifying offense only if the Shepard documents "speak plainly" in establishing the elements of his conviction. Mathis , 136 S.Ct. at 2257 .

Washington v. Tobeck

432 F. App'x 900 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 28, 2011

Defendants claim on appeal that Washington cannot overcome qualified immunity under either prong. … Second, and alternatively, Defendants argue that, even if they violated his Fourth Amendment rights in entering without exigent circumstances, they are still entitled to qualified immunity because the law did not clearly

Montgomery County Commission v. Federal Housing Finance Agency

776 F.3d 1247 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 16, 2015

See Kay County, 754 F.3d at 1029 (“all taxation clearly encompasses all taxation, including the Transfer Tax”). … to address whether Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac indeed qualify as federal instrumentalities.”

William Penn Life Insurance Company of New York v. James Sands

912 F.2d 1359 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 25, 1990

In January 1988, Pellegrino tested positive for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and was diagnosed as having Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). On January 18, 1988, Taylor died as a result of AIDS. … Following this qualifying introductory statement are a series of questions relating to the health of the insured, including question 5h.

United States v. Al-Arian

514 F.3d 1184 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 25, 2008

However, the district court’s factual findings regarding the scope of the agreement will be set aside only if they are clearly erroneous. Raulerson v. United States, 901 F.2d 1009, 1012 (11th Cir. 1990). … The exclusion of a standard plea agreement provision requiring a defendant to cooperate with the government, whether voluntarily or under subpoena, does not establish that the government immunized Al-Arian from future

Kenneth Parson, Jr. v. Ann Coffin

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 2, 2026

established law. … Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from suit in their individual ca- pacities unless their conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional

Quiles Ex Rel. Estate of Quiles v. City of Tampa Police Department

596 F. App'x 816 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 5, 2015

“Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … To avoid summary judgment based on qualified immunity, Plaintiff must show both that Officer Savitt violated a federal right and that the right was already clearly established when Officer Savitt acted. See id.

Jonathan A. Sasser v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 10, 2023

We focus primarily on the first method of the analysis, in which “the law can be ‘clearly established’ for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S. … established, so they were entitled to qualified immunity.

Leal v. Secretary, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

620 F.3d 1280 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 22, 2010

The consistency between the Hospital’s letters and its report to the Data Bank establishes the report’s factual accuracy in the only sense that matters under the Act. … The plain language of § 11151(9) makes it clear that actual harm to a patient is not a prerequisite for a disciplinary action to qualify as a professional review action.

Harris Corporation v. National Iranian Radio and Television and Bank Melli Iran, Defendants

691 F.2d 1344 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 22, 1982

This sufficiently establishes a “direct effect” within the meaning of § 1605(a)(2). Cf. … Clearly, Melli has “purposefully avail[ed] itself of the privilege of conducting activities” in the United States, Hanson v.