Case law

Rankin v. Klevenhagen

5 F.3d 103 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 18, 1993

First, we determine whether the plaintiff has "allege[d] the violation of a clearly established constitutional right." Siegert v. Gilley, --- U.S. ----, ----, 111 S.Ct. 1789, 1793, 114 L.Ed.2d 277 (1991). … "Whether a defendant asserting qualified immunity may be personally liable turns on the objective legal reasonableness of the defendant's actions assessed in light of clearly established law." Mouille v.

Jose Davila v. USA

713 F.3d 248 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 3, 2013

“Qualified immunity protects public officers from suit if their conduct does not violate any ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” Bishop v. … Once the NPS Rangers raised the qualified immunity defense, the plaintiffs bore the burden of showing that the facts alleged demonstrated that the officer violated a constitutional right, and that the right was clearly established

Ramirez v. Knoulton

542 F.3d 124 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 26, 2008

If we find such a violation, “we next consider whether the defendant’s actions were objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law at the time of the conduct in question.” … “To prevail on an excessive force claim, a plaintiff must establish: ‘(1) injury (2) which resulted directly and only from a use of force that was clearly excessive, and (3) the excessiveness of which was clearly unreasonable

Izen v. Catalina

256 F.3d 324 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 29, 2001

Qualified Immunity Izen also appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … The basic rule of qualified immunity is that: “Government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Daniel Johnson v. Joe Kegans and John Holmes

870 F.2d 992 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 24, 1989

Henzel affirms a summary judgment for the defendant on the basis of qualified immunity, noting that "[sjtate officials are protected by a qualified immunity from *996 § 1983 damage suits upon a showing that they acted in … Fowler reverses a judgment for the defendants based on qualified immunity, reasoning that the constitutional right violated was clearly established at the time, but does not advert to absolute immunity.

Errol Lynch v. Joseph S. Cannatella, Jr.

810 F.2d 1363 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 27, 1987

To the extent that it turns on an issue of law, the denial of a claim of qualified official immunity is immediately appealable under the “collateral order” doctrine established by Cohen v. … The thesis that official immunity abides unless “clearly established” constitutional rights are violated was first asserted 21 and still remains as a litmus to shield officials who act in a situation in which the bounds of

Murray v. Earle

405 F.3d 278 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 13, 2005

Fifth Amendment Violation: Qualified Immunity In undertaking a qualified immunity analysis, we must first determine whether the plaintiff has suffered a violation of his constitutional rights and, if so, whether a … Clearly Established Law To overcome a claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must establish that the right an official is alleged to have violated was “clearly established,” i.e., sufficiently clearly defined that

Anthony Gibson v. Jeffrey Kilpatrick

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 2, 2015

was clearly established. … Qualified Immunity A.

Nadiya Williams-Boldware v. Denton County Texas

741 F.3d 635 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 31, 2014

They also moved to dismiss based upon qualified immunity. The district court ordered Williams-Boldware to file a Rule 7 reply on the issue of qualified immunity. … If the answer is in the affirmative, we then ask whether the official’s actions were objectively reasonable in light of the clearly established right.” Id.

Kevin Lee Stevens v. Gerald Corbell

798 F.2d 120 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 8, 1986

The Supreme Court holds that governmental officers performing discretionary actions in line of duty are immune from civil liability for their actions unless they violate clearly established law. E.g., Mitchell v. … Here the district court denied defendants’ immunity on an issue of law: the scope of qualified immunity.

Jessica Jauch v. Choctaw County

886 F.3d 534 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 29, 2018

For all these reasons, the governing law was not clearly established to justify denying qualified immunity to the sheriff. Under Wesby, Jones is not a closely analogous case. … Thus, qualified immunity applies. Our function in this appeal is to determine whether clearly established rights of this prisoner were violated. They were not.

Ganther v. Ingle

75 F.3d 207 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 16, 1996

Second, they argue that the claims against them in their personal capacities are barred under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … In assessing a claim of qualified immunity, this court engages in a two part analysis.9 The court first determines if the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional or statutory

Kenneth Nunley v. City of Waco

440 F. App'x 275 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 1, 2011

better qualified.” … Servs., 47 F.3d 1438, 1444 (5th Cir. 1995) (“A fact finder can infer pretext if it finds that the employee was ‘clearly better qualified’ (as opposed to merely better or as qualified).”).

Keenan v. Tejeda

290 F.3d 252 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 29, 2002

Qualified Immunity Whether a government official is entitled to qualified immunity, to the extent that it turns on a question of law, is a question that we review de novo, even where the district court has … If the officer’s conduct was objectively reasonable in the light of clearly established federal law, he is entitled to qualified immunity from suit.

Pena v. Starr County, Texas

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 28, 2026

To overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must establish that “the plaintiff’s version of th[e] disputed facts . . . constitute[s] a violation of clearly established law.” Joseph ex rel. Est. of Joseph v. … qualified immunity).

Baker v. Putnal

75 F.3d 190 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 15, 1996

First, the court must determine whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Id. at 231, 111 S.Ct. at 13 1792-93. … If the plaintiff fails this step, the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.

Warnock v. Pecos County

116 F.3d 776 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 3, 1997

The judges filed a response in which they argued that they were entitled to qualified immunity. … finances and speaking out about genuine fiscal problems. 25 Clearly established law will not defeat qualified immunity if "an objectively reasonable view of the facts" might lead an official not to realize that he was breaking

Robert Tolan v. Jeffrey Cotton

538 F. App'x 374 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 1, 2013

Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. Id. (citing Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 640 (1987)). … force against Robbie and Marian and that he did not warrant qualified immunity because the law was so clearly established that an objectively reasonable officer in Cotton’s position would have known that his actions violated

Sikes v. Gaytan

218 F.3d 491 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 26, 2000

It is clear, however, that regardless of whether the trial court submits the issues of liability and qualified immunity in one or two interrogatories, the central focus is on whether the trial court correctly and clearly … was objectively reasonable in the light of the legal rules clearly established at the time of the incident in issue and that the defendant is therefore not liable.

Rykers v. Alford

832 F.2d 895 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 25, 1987

Officer Maurice Fuqua 12 Officer Fuqua is protected by qualified immunity for his official acts, so long as he "does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that must be established by the official. Harlow, 457 U.S. at 815 , 102 S.Ct. at 2736 .