Case law

Meyer v. Austin Ind School

167 F.3d 887 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 16, 1998

amount to a violation of clearly established law.'”) … the federal right allegedly infringed was “clearly established.”

Watson v. Sch Bd of Franklin Parish

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 16, 2023

While the suit was pending, the district court dismissed the claims against the school board members and Johnson in their individual capacities on grounds of qualified and statutory immunity. … “Showing that two candidates are similarly qualified does not establish pretext under this standard,” Price v. Fed. Exp.

Ford v. Anderson County

90 F.4th 736 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 8, 2024

purposes of qualified immunity. … This court’s unpublished opinions cannot clearly establish the law for the purposes of qualified immunity, but they nevertheless may “aptly illustrate[] the established right.” Cooper v.

Richard Rheaume v. The Texas Department of Public Safety

666 F.2d 925 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 1, 1982

his constitutional and state claims, did not address Saffell’s qualified immunity claim. … The fulcrum ... is the existence, at the time of the official’s action, of clearly established judicial decisions that make his action unconstitutional. 651 F.2d at 1121 .

James Snyder, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Sidney Trepagnier, City of New Orleans, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee

142 F.3d 791 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 27, 1998

On the basis of these answers, the district court granted Trepagnier qualified immunity. … There are two components to the qualified immunity inquiry: “ ‘[ (1) ] clearly established law and [ (2) ] the information the ... officers possessed.’ ” Hunter, 502 U.S. at 227 , 112 S.Ct. at 536 (quoting Anderson v.

Austin v. Harrison County TX

328 F.3d 204 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 25, 2003

Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 232 (1991). of qualified immunity and official immunity. … City of Baton Rouge, 211 out the violation of a clearly established F.3d 913, 918-19 (5th Cir. 2000).

Felix Tamez v. City Of San Marcos, Texas

118 F.3d 1085 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 15, 1997

Because qualified immunity is an affirmative defense, the defendant must both plead and establish his entitlement to immunity. Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635, 640 , 100 S.Ct. 1920, 1923 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980); Cronen v. … As such, Misiaszek satisfies the first requirement of the Harlow test for qualified immunity. 34 Whether Misiaszek's actions violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known, as Tamez contends

Timpa v. Dillard

20 F.4th 1020 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 15, 2021

On summary judgment, the district court granted qualified immunity to the Officers in their individual capacity on the basis that “there was no law clearly establishing Defendants’ conduct as a constitutional violation … The doctrine of qualified immunity shields “government officials performing discretionary functions . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or

Linda Anne Scott, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. University of Mississippi, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee

148 F.3d 493 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 27, 1998

Coolbaugh clearly establishes that Congress’s § 5 enforcement powers are not limited to suspect classifications. … clearly better qualified.

Joseph Alfonso, IV v. United States

752 F.3d 622 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 12, 2014

and his accident to qualify the Guard’s activity as “emergency prepar- edness.” … Second, it is well established under Louisiana law that Section 22 does not bar the legisla- ture from creating various areas of statutory immunity. Crier v. Whitecloud, 496 So. 2d 305, 309−10 (La. 1986).

Sauceda v. Lopez

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 8, 2025

The district court granted summary judgment to Lopez on qualified immunity grounds after determining that there was no constitutional violation. … Sauceda contends that qualified immunity should not apply because “[t]he law was clearly established . . . that entry of the curtilage . . . to conduct a warrantless arrest without a valid exception was a violation.”

Robin Mayfield v. Butler Snow, L.L.P.

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 23, 2020

But in the context of qualified immunity, it is the plaintiff’s burden to establish that an allegedly violated right was clearly established. See, e.g., Wigginton v. Jones, 964 F.3d 329, 338 (5th Cir. 2020). … True, the Supreme Court has blessed our “sound discretion” to pivot solely on prong two of the qualified-immunity analysis.1 And “clearly established law” is often outcome-determinative.

Finch v. Fort Bend Independent School District

333 F.3d 555 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 20, 2003

To deny a summary judgment motion based on qualified immunity, a district court must determine both (1) that certain conduct “violate[d] clearly established statutory rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Even if the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right, the official is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct was objectively reasonable. See Lukan v.

Nieto v. San Perlita Independent School District

894 F.2d 174 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 16, 1990

the plaintiff's clearly established right to protected speech. … Consequently, the defendants did not violate a clearly established constitutional right secured to Nieto. They are therefore entitled to qualified immunity and dismissal from this suit.

Austin Municipal Securities, Inc. v. National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., Defendants

757 F.2d 676 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 15, 1985

Generally, these officials receive only qualified immunity, which protects them from liability for civil damages if their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Although discovery should not proceed in an immunity case until the court determines that the law in question was clearly established at the time of the official’s conduct, id. at 2739, officials possessing qualified immunity

John P. McNamara v. J. C. Moody, Etc.

606 F.2d 621 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 15, 1979

This immunity varies according to the scope of the official’s discretion and responsibility. 6 Id. Procunier v. Navarette, supra, establishes that it is this qualified immunity, as developed in Scheuer v. … Strickland clarified the Scheuer defense by establishing a dual test for measuring the existence of qualified immunity which requires both an objective and a subjective measurement of official conduct.

Sappington v. Bartee

195 F.3d 234 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 24, 1999

We agree with him that the summary judgment record establishes his entitlement to qualified immunity, and accordingly reverse and render judgment in his favor. 1 District Judge of the Eastern District … Qualified immunity attaches to individual defendants’ actions “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

Boyd v. McNamara

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 24, 2023

Because Johnson has asserted qualified immunity, Boyd must show the violation of a constitutional right and that “the ‘right at issue was “clearly established” at the time of [the] alleged misconduct.’” … C Defendants also assert in a footnote that “it is not clear” whether our precedents, as opposed to the Supreme Court’s, can clearly establish the law for purposes of qualified immunity.

David Stratta v. Billy Harris

961 F.3d 340 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 29, 2020

BVGCD asserted failure to state a claim because Fazzino’s property interest in groundwater is not “clearly established,” his claims against the Directors are barred by qualified immunity, and Stratta’s right to speak, as … The district court discussed this claim only in terms of qualified immunity for the Board, and in that respect held that Fazzino’s right to equal protection, if any, was not clearly established because GCDs have broad discretionary

Eduardo Trejo v. Ivan Perez

693 F.2d 482 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 13, 1982

Although Harlow purports to “defin[e] the limits of qualified immunity essentially in objective terms,” once an official’s conduct has violated clearly established law, Harlow requires him to claim extraordinary circumstances … Of course, if the underlying offense is clearly established, an arrest for its violation without probable cause is a violation of clearly established law. We read Saldana to say no more.