Case law

Wu v. Thomas

847 F.2d 1480 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 7, 1988

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination in promotion, a plaintiff must prove: (1) he or she is a member of a protected minority; (2) was qualified for and applied for the promotion; (3) was rejected despite these … Appellant clearly failed to show she was qualified for promotion to professor. 26 Appellant also failed to prove that an equally or less qualified male was promoted during the time of her promotional application.

Rebecca Lewis, Brenda Heath v. David McDade Individually and in His Official Capacity as District Attorney

250 F.3d 1320 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 21, 2001

Lanier, 520 U.S. 259, 267, 269 , 117 S.Ct. 1219 , 137 L.Ed.2d 432 (1997). 8 In Anderson, the Supreme Court held that for a right to be clearly established such that a defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity, "[t]he … The Cross Court found this conduct to be in violation of clearly established. The clearly established law upon which it relied was the 1979 Supreme Court case of Davis v.

Melanie Lydia Dacosta v. Stanislaus Nwachukwa

304 F.3d 1045 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 18, 2002

. § 1983, on the basis of qualified immunity. … Hence, the district court erred in denying Appellant qualified immunity.

McMILLIAN v. JOHNSON

88 F.3d 1554 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 3, 1996

The issue for qualified immunity purposes, however, is not whether the due process right not to be punished before conviction was clearly established. … Clearly Established Law Prohibited Police Suppression of Exculpatory and Impeachment Evidence 64 Tate, Ikner, and Benson are protected by qualified immunity unless their actions violated clearly established law.

Daniel Kordash v. United States

51 F.4th 1289 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 21, 2022

The district court found that the officers had qualified immunity and dismissed the complaint. … And it held that the officers had qualified immunity as to Kordash’s Bivens claims.

Kimberley Diane Settle v. David Collier

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 9, 2025

It denied qualified immunity because it was “clearly established since at least 2013 that when a driver does not use or does not threaten to use his car as a weapon, an officer may not use deadly force … When officers raise the defense of qualified immunity, they have “the burden to establish that they were acting within their discretionary authority.” Ingram v.

Penley v. Eslinger

605 F.3d 843 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 3, 2010

In civil rights actions brought under § 1983, the doctrine of qualified immunity “offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established … Once the defendant establishes that he was acting within his discretionary authority, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that qualified immunity is not appropriate. Lee v.

McMILLIAN v. JOHNSON

101 F.3d 1363 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 3, 1996

established. … The court held that Garner did not clearly establish that deadly force cannot be used against a fleeing, previously arrested, non-dangerous felon.

51 Fair empl.prac.cas. 962, 53 Fair empl.prac.cas. 304, 52 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 39,504, 52 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 39,728 Guydell Horlock v. Georgia Department of Human Resources

890 F.2d 388 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 31, 1990

immunity from damages because defendants' actions allegedly did not violate any "clearly established" right of plaintiff, as required in order to avoid the qualified immunity of public officials to such suits. 14 On February … the qualified immunity claim.

Rachael DeMarcus v. University of South Alabama

133 F.4th 1305 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 10, 2025

“A right may be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes in one of three ways: (1) case law with indis- tinguishable facts clearly establishing the constitutional right; (2) a broad statement … establish- ing the law for qualified-immunity purposes.

Edward R. Lane v. Central Alabama Community College

772 F.3d 1349 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 24, 2014

We also said that, even if a First Amendment violation had occurred, Franks would be entitled to qualified immunity from the claim against him individually because Lane’s First Amendment right was not clearly established … As a result, Franks was entitled to qualified immunity from the claim made against 1 Lane’s claim against Franks in his official capacity is now a claim against Susan Burrow, in her official capacity as CACC’s acting

Burnette v. Taylor

533 F.3d 1325 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 10, 2008

The magistrate also concluded that Defendants were not shielded by qualified immunity. Defendants filed their objection to the report and recommendation. … Bozeman, 422 F.3d at 1270-71 (concluding that qualified immunity attaches unless it is "already clearly established in such a particularized way to make obvious the conclusion for all reasonable, similarly situated jail officials

Richard D. Jackson v. David M. McCurry

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 12, 2019

establish law for qualified immunity). … established law and so he is entitled to qualified immunity.

Marie Butler v. Bob Gualtieri

41 F.4th 1329 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 25, 2022

pro- tection provided by qualified immunity would be “irretrievably lost[.]” … There, Flor- ida’s high court conclusively established the scope and meaning of its sovereign immunity statute: In Florida, sovereign immunity is both an immunity from liability and an immunity from suit. .

76 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 1, 72 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 45,214, 11 Fla. L. Weekly C1017 Anais A. Badia v. City of Miami, a Municipal Corporation, Wally Lee, Individually and as Director of Department of Public Works

133 F.3d 1443 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 30, 1998

If it is unclear whether Badia's complaints were of the kind held to involve a matter of public concern, then Lee's alleged actions did not violate clearly established First Amendment rights and he is entitled to qualified … Lee's alleged actions did not violate clearly established First Amendment rights, and qualified immunity protects Lee from Badia's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 First Amendment claim. 9 Thus, we reverse in part and affirm in part.

Steven A. Stepanian, II v. David R. Addis

699 F.2d 1046 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 7, 1983

In the alternative, he claimed he acted in good faith and was entitled to qualified immunity. … The trial court denied the motion for absolute immunity and stated further factual development was needed to determine if Addis could claim a qualified immunity.

Robert Allen Jordan v. John Doe, Chief U.S. Marshal, David Adkins, Lydia Blakey, Joseph Enders, John Hardman, Augustus Lawson and Ivar Swanson, Robert Allen Jordan v. John Doe, U.S. Marshal, Deputy U.S. Marshal, United States of America, David Adkins, Lydia Blakey, Joseph Enders, John Hardman, Ivar Swanson, Augustus Lawson

38 F.3d 1559 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 2, 1994

Fitzgerald and its Progeny 19 The Supreme Court established the test for qualified immunity in Harlow v. … 'violated clearly established constitutional law' " under Harlow.

Lindsey M. Scott v. Larry Dixon

720 F.2d 1542 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 15, 1983

Kelley and Latham Police officers do not enjoy absolute immunity from civil liability for § 1983 violations. Instead, they acquire a qualified immunity only for the good faith performance of their duties. Pierson v. … Officials “are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” 457 U.S. at 818, 102

Rayburn v. Hogue

241 F.3d 1341 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 28, 2001

Additionally, the Hogues argued that they were not State actors for Fourteenth Amendment purposes, and even if they were, the federal law as to foster parents was not clearly established. 8 Based on these arguments, the Defendants … In denying summary judgment on this claim, the court found that the Hogues were not entitled to qualified immunity because they were State actors, the law was clearly established as to foster parents, and there was a jury

John Carter v. James Galloway

352 F.3d 1346 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 15, 2003

The district court also addressed Defendants’ qualified immunity defense. Because Plaintiff’s deliberate indifference claim fails, Defendants have no need for qualified immunity. … If Plaintiff has stated a good deliberate indifference claim, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for the law was not clearly established in Plaintiff’s favor. 10