Case law

Crosby v. Paulk

187 F.3d 1339 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 10, 1999

Qualified immunity protects government officials who have acted within their discretionary authority from civil trials and other litigation burdens “if their conduct violates no ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional … With these guiding precepts governing entitlement to qualified immunity, we examine the circumstances under which Sheriff Paulk, Commander Winningham, Agent Griffin, and Agent Kendrick acted in view of clearly established

Caban-Wheeler v. Elsea

71 F.3d 837 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 4, 1996

Qualified Immunity The defendants also argue that William Elsea, Robert Brisbane, Ellinor Dye, Herbert Mabry, and Charles Cherry are entitled to qualified immunity. … Ricks is not clearly erroneous.

United States v. William Copeland

381 F.3d 1101 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 23, 2004

But a reduction in sentence in exchange for cooperation is 16 much more clearly intended as a boon to defendants than is a promise to immunize defendants from charges based on their … But this does not necessarily establish Copeland’s reasonable understanding of the situation. 6 Cf.

Hercaire International, Inc. v. Argentina

821 F.2d 559 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 14, 1987

The credit memo clearly states that the credit is “against future purchases.” … Under the framework established by Congress, the FSIA grants foreign states immunity from suit and from execution in U.S. courts, subject to certain specified exceptions. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1604-07 , 1609-11.

Nos. 93-9158, 93-9324

49 F.3d 696 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 31, 1995

Under the qualified immunity defense, the defendants are immune from liability if Wooten's complaint fails to state a violation of a "clearly established statutory or constitutional right[ ] of which a reasonable person would … Under the qualified immunity standards, Wooten fails to demonstrate that the defendants violated a clearly established right.

Crosby v. Hospital Authority of Valdosta & Lowndes County

93 F.3d 1515 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 11, 1996

This finding is not clearly erroneous. … Crosby's argument that Georgia's Constitution establishes a policy against restraints on trade.

Kathryn Walker v. Secretary of the Army

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 31, 2024

Gladden, 777 F.3d 1198, 1209 (11th Cir. 2015) (“In order to authorize official-capacity suits, Congress must clearly waive the federal government’s sovereign immunity.”). … Congress clearly drew a line at 14 days and only provided for judicial review when the suspension surpasses that mark.

Diverse Power, Inc. v. City of LaGrange, Georgia

934 F.3d 1270 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 20, 2019

And denials of immunity from suit—like denials of sovereign and qualified immunities—are immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine. P.R. Aqueduct & Sewer Auth. v. … Ct. 684, 689 (1993) (sovereign immunity); Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 536, 105 S. Ct. 2806, 2820 (1985) (qualified immunity).

Jerry Charges Vaughn v. Fred Lawrence Cox

264 F.3d 1027 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 31, 2001

immunity. … immunity.

George M. Weaver v. Jerry B. Blackstock

309 F.3d 1312 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 18, 2002

and as sued in their individual capacities they were entitled to qualified immunity. … We find that the district court was correct in determining that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity from civil damages.

Tiffany Thomas v. Clayton County Bd. of Education

261 F.3d 1160 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 15, 2001

Qualified immunity provides complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities as long as “their conduct violates no ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … As noted supra, officials sued in their individual capacities under § 1983 are generally entitled to qualified immunity unless a factually similar and controlling case has clearly established that the conduct is impermissible

Gerald Fred Webb v. William P. Ethridge and Charles Gay

849 F.2d 546 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 13, 1988

preclude a grant of summary judgment based on qualified immunity.” … Webb’s clearly established rights "of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Rogers v. Miller

57 F.3d 986 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 22, 1995

Qualified, or "good faith" immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages arising out of the performance of their discretionary functions "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … We hold only that the defendants are immune from damages because no caselaw existing at the time of these events clearly established that such conduct, under the circumstances, constituted "adverse employment action" prohibited

Brown v. City of Fort Lauderdale

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 8, 1999

The question of qualified immunity rests on whether the law is “clearly established” and whether the facts alleged violate that law. … Whether the facts alleged violate clearly established law is a purely legal question.

Allan Lowe, Peggy Lowe, Patsy Smith, Irvin Smith v. Nancy Aldridge, James Davis, Victoria Karp, Victoria Lowe, Sharon Moody, Cobb County Georgia, William Howard Oakes, Anne M. Oakes, Plaintiffs-Counter-Defendants v. James E. Davis, Nancy Aldridge, Defendants-Counter-Claimants, Sharon Moody, Cobb County, Georgia

958 F.2d 1565 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 27, 1992

a violation of clearly established rights of which a reasonable official in defendant's circumstances would have known." … Id. at 1564 . 25 In order for a right to be clearly established and defeat an official's claim to qualified immunity, 26 [t]he contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that

Redd v. City of Enterprise

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 13, 1998

A public official is entitled to qualified immunity from a section 1983 damages action if his actions did not violate clearly established law. See Thornton v. City of Macon, 132 F.3d 1395, 1399 (11th Cir. 1997). … It is clearly established that an arrest made without probable cause violates the Fourth Amendment. See Von Stein v. Brescher, 904 F.2d 572, 579 (11th Cir. 1990).

Isaac Industries, Inc. v. Bariven S.A.

127 F.4th 289 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 24, 2025

Without an official “act” or valid contract, Pequiven argued that Isaac could not establish the commercial-ac- tivity exception to sovereign immunity. … Pequiven clearly had some rela- tionship to Bariven and some role in the original transaction: each invoice listed Pequiven as a consignee.

Bussinger v. City of New Smyrna Beach

50 F.3d 922 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 20, 1995

Appellants moved for summary judgment, alleging qualified immunity and other grounds. … established law.

Lonnie Benjamin and Harold Hicken v. The City of Montgomery

785 F.2d 959 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 2, 1986

The transcript of the state court proceeding clearly establishes that the Mayor discharged the appellants because they agreed to testify only under this condition. … A: The information I received, that everything they said was qualified.

Consolidated Gas Company of Florida, Inc. v. City Gas Company of Florida, a Florida Corporation

880 F.2d 297 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 10, 1989

For private conduct to qualify for immunity under the state action doctrine, the challenged restraint must be (1) “ ‘one clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed as state policy,’ ” and (2) “the policy must be ‘actively … Even if the first prong of the Mid-cal test was satisfied, which it was not, the territorial agreement would also have to be actively supervised by the State to qualify for immunity.