Case law

Elana Casines, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Paul Murchek, Etc., Eugene Walden, Iii, Etc., William Abbey, Etc., Phillip Ware, Etc., and Louie L. Wainwright, Elana Casines, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Paul Murchek, Etc., Eugene Walden, Iii, Etc., William Abbey, Etc., Phillip Ware, Etc., and Louie L. Wainwright

766 F.2d 1494 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 29, 1985

Qualified Immunity 28 The district court ruled that the appellants were not entitled to qualified immunity because Casines's right to a pre-termination hearing was clearly established at the time of her discharge. … Rather, she argues that appellants are not entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct violated clearly established state law.

Dustin Orr v. Deputy James Rogers

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2021

immunity because Orr had not alleged a violation of a clearly established right. … immunity because he did not set forth any constitutional violation that was “clearly established.”

Cooper v. Smith

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 26, 1996

"clearly established" rights under federal law. Id. It must be kept in mind that the sweep of qualified immunity is necessarily broad. … If we find that such a right was clearly established, then Smith is stripped of the protection that qualified immunity affords, insofar as Cooper's speech in cooperating with the GBI caused Smith's adverse employment action

Sheth v. City of Mobile

137 F.3d 1447 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 2, 1998

suit unless they violate clearly established law”). … The district court correctly concluded that the facts alleged by plaintiff, as they relate to Webster, established a violation of clearly established law.

Jones v. Preuit & Mauldin

808 F.2d 1435 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 2, 1987

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY 14 In granting the defendants summary judgment, the district court also relied on the fact that P & M had acted in good faith reliance on a statute that was not clearly unconstitutional. … they violated was not clearly established.

Priester v. City of Riviera Beach

208 F.3d 919 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 4, 2000

Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … A narrow exception exists to the rule requiring particularized case law to establish clearly the law in excessive force cases.

Mason v. Cherokee County, AL

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 9, 1996

Judicially created qualified immunity enables a public official to avoid suit on an alleged constitutional or federal law violation where the law governing the claimed right was not clearly established at … The relevant question on a motion for summary judgment based on a defense of qualified immunity is whether a reasonable official could have believed his or her actions were lawful in light of clearly established

Sheth v. City of Mobile

137 F.3d 1447 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 2, 1998

("Thus as a general rule, city officials are immune from suit unless they violate clearly established law"). … The same facts which establish Sergeant Williams' entitlement to qualified immunity establish that his acts were not willful, malicious or in bad faith.

Rebecca Lewis v. Douglas County, Georgia

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 9, 2001

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. … 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 contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official

Popham v. City of Kennesaw

820 F.2d 1570 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 15, 1987

Although the court never explicitly instructed the jury that the qualified immunity claim did not apply to the excessive force claim, the court's subsequent explanation of the verdict form did not clearly contradict the effect … In explaining the verdict form, the court stated: Question 4 is a question on qualified immunity.

Flores v. Cochran

137 F.3d 1275 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 23, 1998

Holston, we wrote: Once the qualified immunity defense is raised, plaintiffs bear the burden of showing that the federal rights allegedly violated were clearly established.... … Talladega City Bd. of Educ., 115 F.3d 821, 826-27 n. 4 (11th Cir.1997) (en banc) ("In this circuit, the law can be "clearly established' for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S.

The Naturist Society, Inc., T.A. Wyner v. John Fillyaw, Individually and as Official Park Manager, John D. MacArthur Beach State Park, Florida

958 F.2d 1515 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 22, 1992

Qualified Immunity In considering the Society’s damages claim, the district court must also bear in mind the applicable law regarding qualified immunity. … As we have previously observed, the qualified immunity doctrine "aims at one goal: to keep the public official out of the courtroom, free to exercise discretionary duties under clearly established law without the constant

Clemente Javier Aguirre-Jarquin v. Robert Hemmert

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 4, 2025

She ar- gues, in part, that it was not clearly established that her conduct was unlawful. … immunity here does not implicate our reasoning for granting qualified immunity to Hemmert and Grossi in Count III.

Hawk v. Georgia Department of Corrections

44 F.3d 965 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 14, 1995

We affirm the decision of the district court that Whitworth was entitled to qualified immunity. … There are at least three unanswered questions of law that prevent the law from being clearly established and thus require that qualified immunity be granted.

Kyle K. v. Britton Dennis

208 F.3d 940 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 5, 2000

Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability if their conduct violates “no clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity in a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss 3 only if the complaint fails to allege facts that would show a violation of a clearly established

Badia v. City of Miami

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 30, 1998

rights and he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Lee's alleged actions did not violate clearly established First Amendment rights, 5 and qualified immunity protects Lee from Badia's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 First Amendment claim.

Arthur Knight v. Jacobson, Officer, Badge 3359, Individual

300 F.3d 1272 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 18, 2002

CARNES, Circuit Judge: This appeal by a law enforcement officer from the denial of qualified immunity presents us with these three issues: 1) whether there was an absence of probable cause for the officer’s arrest of the … Cannon, 174 F.3d 1271 , 1283 n. 3 (11th Cir.1999) (“Arguable probable cause, not the higher standard of actual probable cause, governs the qualified immunity inquiry.”); Montoute v.

Kyle K. v. Britton Dennis

208 F.3d 940 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 5, 2000

Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability if their conduct violates "no clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity in a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss only if the complaint fails to allege facts that would show a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

Mastroianni v. Bowers

160 F.3d 671 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 13, 1998

The district court, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to Mastroianni, found that the appellants were not entitled to qualified immunity for their arrest of Mastroianni because “clearly established law dictate … Second, appellants contend that even if absolute immunity does not protect them, they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate any clearly established law in

McMillian v. Johnson

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 9, 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 Tate, Ikner, and Benson are protected by qualified immunity unless their actions violated clearly established