Case law

Reitz v. Woods

85 F.4th 780 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 2, 2023

“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 … Accordingly, Woods is not entitled to qualified immunity on this claim; it must proceed to trial.

Randy Cole v. Michael Hunter

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 21, 2019

Garner does not formulate “clearly established law” with the degree of specificity required by the Supreme Court’s decisions on qualified immunity. … Ct. at 1776 (“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.”); Wilson v.

Jesus Hernandez v. USA

757 F.3d 249 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 30, 2014

The doctrine of qualified immunity, which operates the same under both § 1983 and Bivens , “protects public officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … In assessing qualified immunity, we determine “(1) whether the facts that the plaintiff has alleged make out a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time of

Hughes v. Garcia

100 F.4th 611 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 3, 2024

If established, such misstatements constitute a clearly established Fourth Amendment violation under Franks v. Delaware. … That violation has been clearly established since Franks.

Michael Petzold v. Mike Rostollan

946 F.3d 242 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 27, 2019

established statutory or constitutional law of which a reasonable person would have known.” 70 To rebut the qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must show two things: (1) the allegations make out a violation, and (2) … the violation was “clearly established” at the time of the defendant’s conduct. 71 Defendants here properly invoked qualified immunity.

Deborah Morris v. Dillard Department Stores, Inc, Dillard Department Stores, Inc Liberty Mutual Insurance Co R.W. Brown City of Bossier City

277 F.3d 743 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 26, 2001

First, we determine whether a plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right, and second, whether the officer’s conduct was “objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law at the … The parties do not dispute that Morris has alleged deprivation of her clearly established right to be free from arrest and search without probable cause, or that the right was clearly established at the time of her arrest

Robert Stanley Williams v. Samuel P. Collins, Jr.

728 F.2d 721 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 2, 1984

Second, Harlow —which relied on Nixon’s jurisdictional analysis to establish its own jurisdiction, Harlow, 102 S.Ct. at 2732 n. 1 —placed great emphasis, in its decision to eliminate the subjective prong of qualified immunity … This distinction between absolute and qualified immunity may well not survive Harlow’s language on the function of qualified immunity.

Alice L. Ex Rel. R.L. v. Dusek

492 F.3d 563 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 12, 2007

Although qualified immunity is “an entitlement to be free from the burdens of time-consuming pre- trial matters and the trial process itself,” Williams v. … To the extent that Dusek is subject to discovery requests on claims for which she does not or cannot assert qualified immunity, such discovery requests do not implicate her right to qualified immunity.

Loftin v. City of Prentiss, MS

33 F.4th 774 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 12, 2022

Officer Jones and Chief Bullock would nevertheless be entitled to qualified immunity. … “Fair notice requires clearly established law.” Nerio v. Evans, 974 F.3d 571, 575 (5th Cir. 2020).

Laughlin v. Olszewski,et al

102 F.3d 190 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 30, 1996

An official's conduct is protected by qualified immunity if it was objectively reasonable in light of legal rules that were clearly established at the time of action. Hale v. Townley, 45 F.3d 914, 919 (5th Cir.1995). … The threshold inquiry in examining a defendant's claim of qualified immunity is a purely legal one—whether the plaintiff "allege[d] the violation of a clearly established constitutional right." Siegert v.

Hoog-Watson v. Guadalupe County, Tex.

591 F.3d 431 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 16, 2009

C Finally, we address the question of the defendants’ entitlement to qualified immunity. … Humphrey and prosecutorial immunity grounds for summary judgment, and that the qualified immunity issue is not before us.

Conroe Creosoting Co. v. Montgomery County, Tex.

249 F.3d 337 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 18, 2001

Moore moved for summary judgment, asserting qualified immunity. … A constitutional right is "clearly established" if "the unlawfulness of the conduct would be apparent to a reasonably competent official." 5 The second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry therefore requires an assessment

Moore v. Carwell

168 F.3d 234 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 5, 1999

established that the search was constitutionally permissible, entitling the Defendants to qualified immunity. … immunity because the constitutionality of the searches was clearly established under Letcher v.

Dilley v. Domingue

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 4, 2024

Bexar Cnty., 560 F.3d 404, 417–18 (5th Cir. 2009) (finding violation of clearly established law on much less egregious facts). … The qualified immunity doctrine, and its clearly estab- lished law requirement, prohibits us from “second-guessing a police officer’s assessment, made on the scene, of the danger presented by a particular situ- ation.”

Wearry v. Foster

33 F.4th 260 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 3, 2022

Take the doctrine of qualified immunity. It requires civil rights plaintiffs to prove not only a violation of their constitutional rights, but a “clearly established” one. … Fitzgerald replaced the subjective good-faith defense for qualified immunity with a clearly- established-law test.”). The same can be said for absolute prosecutorial immunity.

De Leon v. Munoz

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 31, 2025

Re- garding qualified immunity, De Leon argues Munoz’s conduct was not ob- jectively reasonable in light of clearly established law. … An officer is entitled to qualified immunity “if there is no violation, or if the conduct did not violate law clearly established at the time.”

Institute for Free Speech v. Johnson

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 28, 2025

B To defeat a defendant’s invocation of qualified immunity, “a 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 district court did not err in dismissing IFS’s individual-capacity claims for qualified immunity.

Gunaca v. State of Tex.

65 F.3d 467 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 3, 1995

immunity from suit unless their conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … See Blackwell, 34 F.3d at 303 (holding that defendant is entitled to qualified immunity if reasonable officials could differ on the lawfulness of defendant's actions).7 Thus, we affirm on the grounds of qualified immunity

Bishop v. Arcuri

674 F.3d 456 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 9, 2012

We also review a grant of qualified immunity de novo. … 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.” Harlow v.

Macias v. Raul A. (Unknown), Badge No. 153

23 F.3d 94 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 16, 1994

Macias maintains that the police officers cannot assert qualified immunity as to the claimed illegal search. … “Whether a government official is entitled to qualified immunity generally turns on the objective reasonableness of the action assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.”