Case law

Sockwell v. Phelps

20 F.3d 187 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 10, 1994

established in the opinions rendered by Judge Johnson in Washington v. … We further hold that Phelps and Blackburn are not protected under qualified immunity, due to their knowing and intentional participation in a general policy of racial segregation 5 The Tenth Circuit specifically

Bagley v. Guillen

90 F.4th 799 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 10, 2024

Ho, Circuit Judge: Two established principles of law govern this qualified immunity appeal. … The district court granted qualified immunity with respect to the unlawful arrest and illegal detention claims. But the court denied qualified immunity as to Bagley’s excessive force claim.

Jessica Jauch v. Choctaw County

874 F.3d 425 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 24, 2017

Qualified Immunity and Sheriff Halford Sheriff Halford asserts qualified immunity. Jauch bears the burden of showing that he is not so entitled. Hanks v. Rogers, 853 F.3d 738, 744 (5th Cir. 2017). … Tellingly, Sheriff Halford’s arguments relating to qualified immunity do not even mention Jones.

Sweetin v. City of Texas City

48 F.4th 387 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 2, 2022

The court held that even if there was a genuine dispute of material fact about whether Wylie unconstitutionally seized Sweetin and Stefek, the law was not clearly established enough to survive qualified immunity. … (2) the right was “clearly established at the time.”

John Hodorowski and Jeraldine Hodorowski v. Ann Ray, Mary Ellen Burns and Texas Department of Human Resources, Defendants

844 F.2d 1210 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 14, 1988

“Qualified immunity shields only that conduct not violative of clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … More importantly, we note that qualified immunity protects executive officials as long as their actions do not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.

Phillip Turner v. Driver

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 27, 2017

The court reasoned that Turner failed to meet his burden of showing that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity because he failed to show that their actions violated any of his clearly established statutory … doing violates that right.” 17 Thus, the right must already be clearly established “at the time of the challenged conduct.” 18 When considering whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, the court “must ask whether

Wooley v. City of Baton Rouge

211 F.3d 913 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 11, 2000

defendants qualified immunity on this claim.” … The district court concluded that the officer was not entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiffs had alleged a clearly established denial of due process. 56 Smith v.

Alexander v. Eeds

392 F.3d 138 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 23, 2004

Without an established right, qualified immunity is granted. Id. … Therefore, they have not successfully alleged a violation of an established right and qualified immunity was properly granted.

Hayes Williams and Arthur Mitchell v. David C. Treen, Governor of the State of Louisiana

671 F.2d 892 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 31, 1982

Damage Claims And The Qualified Immunity Defense: Was There A Violation Of Clearly Established Law? Qualified immunity is unavailable to those 1983 defendants who violate “clearly *898 established” law. 10 Procunier v. … We must determine whether 1983 defendants are entitled to the protections of a qualified immunity when there has been a violation of clearly established state law.

Roque v. Harvel

993 F.3d 325 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 1, 2021

those rights were clearly established at the time of the violation “such that the officer was on notice of the unlawfulness of his or her conduct.” 6 The unique nature and purpose of qualified immunity affects … immunity unless his “actions were objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law at the time of the” shooting. 31 The critical question when ascertaining the clearly established law is “whether the

Waltman v. Payne

535 F.3d 342 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 10, 2008

clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”1 Qualified immunity protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.”2 Once a government … defense, the plaintiff must show: (1) that he has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right, and (2) that the defendant’s conduct was objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law at

Carlos Nerio, II v. Derek Evans

974 F.3d 571 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 10, 2020

The district court granted qualified immunity to the officers. We affirm. … Evans is entitled to qualified immunity unless Appellant Nerio can show two things: first, that Evans violated a statutory or constitutional right, and second, that “the right at issue was clearly established at the

Tanner Griggs v. Charley Brewer

841 F.3d 308 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 28, 2016

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Because our analysis is under the defense of qualified immunity, the question is whether Brewer’s conduct was clearly unreasonable in the light of clearly established law.

Huey P. McDuffie v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.

935 F.2d 682 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 15, 1991

We therefore hold that Ruiz does not foreclose relitigation of the due process issue via the Committee officials’ qualified immunity plea. 10 (ii) Clearly Established Law — Disciplinary Proceedings Thus, we must look to see … Cannatella, 810 F.2d 1363, 1374 (5th Cir.1987) (qualified immunity accorded to official insofar as conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

Kathy Dyer v. City of Mesquite Texas

964 F.3d 374 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 6, 2020

clearly established law.’” … Turning to prong two of the qualified immunity standard, we ask whether there are genuine disputes of material fact as to whether “the unlawfulness of the [Officers’] conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’”

Izen v. Catalina

382 F.3d 566 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 23, 2004

Qualified Immunity The district court offered alternative reasons for holding that Catalina is entitled to qualified immunity. … The second prong of qualified immunity analysis requires us to determine whether the agent’s conduct violated clearly established federal law. Kinney, 367 F.3d at 350 .

Ruben Loya, Jr. v. Texas Department of Corrections

878 F.2d 860 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 2, 1989

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731, 743 , 102 S.Ct. 2690, 2697 , 73 L.Ed.2d 349 (1982) (interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity). … On the merits we hold that TDC’s entitlement to immunity under the eleventh amendment is clearly established in this circuit. Ruiz v.

Mangieri v. Clifton

29 F.3d 1012 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 24, 1994

A police officer is entitled to claim the cloak of qualified immunity "unless it is shown that, at the time of the incident, he violated a clearly established constitutional right." Spann v. … The right to be free from arrest without probable cause is a clearly established constitutional right. See Beck v.

Colston v. Barnhart

130 F.3d 96 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 29, 1998

Disputes over the application of the clearly-established-law prong of the qualified-immunity inquiry are separable from the merits of a controversy because “‘[a]n appellate court reviewing the denial of the defendant … The semantic switch from discussing the typical qualified-immunity issue of “clearly established law” to a hypothetical (in Behrens) issue of “objective legal reasonableness” creates many of the problems that are now plaguing

Reynaldo Ramirez v. Jim Wells County, Texas

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 30, 2013

Because there was no false arrest, no constitutional violation occurred, and, accordingly, we have no occasion to reach the part of the qualified immunity analysis that asks whether the law was clearly established. … We have explained the ‘clearly established’ prong as follows: Qualified immunity should not be denied unless the law is clear in the more particularized sense that reasonable officials should be “on notice