Case law

Jack E. Turner v. E. T. Raynes and Bill Edd Jones

611 F.2d 92 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 31, 1980

Sheriff Jones’ Qualified Immunity The court below entered summary judgment for Sheriff Jones grounded in his qualified official immunity. This must be upheld. … Searching for clues to the Court’s position, however, we cannot ignore another possible reading of footnote 7: that only a clearly inordinate exercise of unconferred jurisdiction by a judge — one so crass as to establish

Tuttle v. Sepolio

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 23, 2023

Several of the officers moved to dismiss, asserting qualified immunity. … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985) (“Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement

Kinney v. Weaver

367 F.3d 337 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 19, 2004

Yet, at the same time, an official does not lose qualified immunity merely because a certain right is clearly established in the abstract. … It is true that, even without judicial interpretation, violation of a statute can be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes.

United States v. Morton

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 23, 2022

Morton, 984 F.3d 421, 427 (5th Cir. 2021), they do not establish probable cause “that the photographs on Morton’s phones would contain evidence pertinent to [that] crime,” id. at 428. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 236 (2009) (giving courts discretion to rule only on the “clearly established” inquiry for qualified immunity but recognizing that deciding the underlying constitutional question is “often

McClain v. Delgado

132 F.4th 362 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 20, 2025

Once qualified immunity is asserted, the burden “shifts to the plaintiff, who must rebut the defense by establishing a genuine fact issue as to whether the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established … To overcome a qualified-immunity defense, plaintiff “must show: (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct”.

Louis Doss v. John Young

626 F. App'x 453 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 18, 2015

Qualified Immunity Government officials may invoke qualified immunity to shield themselves “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Clearly Established Law Turning to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, we consider whether Helpenstell’s conduct was proscribed by clearly established law at the time of the incident.

Bush v. Strain

513 F.3d 492 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 14, 2008

A government official performing discretionary functions is entitled to qualified immunity unless his conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.21 … We also hold that the defendants have not established that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Harris v. Commissioner

16 F.3d 75 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 10, 1994

Helvering, 293 U.S. 465, 55 S.Ct. 266, 79 L.Ed. 596 (1935) (holding that a transaction, although qualifying in form, failed to qualify in substance as a reorganization because "[t]o hold otherwise would be to exalt artifice … We must, however, accept the Tax Court's findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. Commissioner v. Duberstein, 363 U.S. 278, 291, 80 S.Ct. 1190, 1200, 4 L.Ed.2d 1218 (1960).

Donald Jackson v. Pearl Public School Distr

626 F. App'x 80 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 15, 2015

Although we express no opinion as to whether the school officials’ conduct was constitutionally infirm, we conclude that the school officials are entitled to qualified immunity because it was not “clearly established” in … Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff shows (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was “clearly established” at the

Machete Productions, L.L.C. v. Heather Page

809 F.3d 281 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 28, 2015

4 To overcome an official’s qualified immunity, a plaintiff must plead facts demonstrating “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of … Accordingly, Machete cannot establish that it had a clearly established right to these funds that Morales violated. See Ashcroft, 131 S. Ct. at 2080.

Maldonado v. Rodriguez

932 F.3d 388 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 6, 2019

As to the clearly-established prong of the qualified immunity analysis, the district court held that "the law was clearly established that the First Amendment protected their political support for [Rodriguez's opponent] unless … The district court explained Gunaca simply as a holding in favor of qualified immunity, in which the court did not reach the question of clearly established law.

Johnson v. City of San Antonio

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 20, 2023

Jurisdiction & standard of review: “Qualified immunity shields public officials sued in their individual capacities from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … This is the second step of the qualified-immunity inquiry. See Melton, 875 F.3d at 261 (observing that the plaintiff must show that “the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct”).

Bustos v. Martini Club, Inc.

599 F.3d 458 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 5, 2010

wrong.” 14 We must determine if the Texas Supreme Court decision renders Meadours clearly wrong. … Lyford, 243 F.3d 185, 191 n.18 (5th Cir. 2001) (explaining that a municipality may be liable if a plaintiff states a claim against an official but the official is protected by qualified immunity). 51 Curley

Rombach v. Culpepper

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 13, 2021

a clearly established constitutional right.” … Sheehan, 575 U.S. 600, 613 (2015) (“Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.”).

Foust v. McNeill

310 F.3d 849 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 12, 2002

Thigpen even tional right was not “clearly established” in had judicial authorization to seize certain 1998. … For a right to be “clearly established” in “fixtures” in the building, and he might have the context of qualified immunity, concluded the only reasonable way to do so

Onie Pena v. Dallas County Hospital Dist

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 23, 2015

Ct. 1765, 1776 (2015) (“Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.”). … Qualified immunity thus attaches unless the law is clearly established that the defendant’s conduct amounted to a seizure.

Joseph Wheeler, Cross v. City of Pleasant Grove, a Municipal Corp., Cross

664 F.2d 99 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 18, 1981

We see no reason to disturb this finding under the clearly erroneous rule. … The district court held that the defendants in this action were shielded by the defense of a qualified immunity as set forth in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232 , 94 S.Ct. 1683 , 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974).

Charles v. Grief

522 F.3d 508 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 28, 2007

qualified immunity in which the trial court has determined that the factual dispute is “genuine”; only when denial of qualified immunity turns on whether a genuinely disputed fact is “material” are we authorized to review … unwarranted appeal of an interlocutory denial of qualified immunity.

Magnolia Island Plantation v. Whittington

29 F.4th 246 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 21, 2022

That party—in this case, Lollar— must then show that (1) the “official’s conduct violated a constitutional right” of the opponent of immunity, and (2) “the right was clearly established at the time of the violation … Here, we need not examine the “clearly established” prong, because Lollar has failed to meet her burden of showing a constitutional violation. 5 Case: 20-30805 Document

Mark Cowart v. Erwin

837 F.3d 444 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 13, 2016

Erwin nevertheless claims that she is entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shelters state officials from liability only “to the extent that the officials’ actions do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.” 29 “A public official is entitled to qualified