Case law

Geter v. Fortenberry

849 F.2d 1550 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 26, 1988

Qualified immunity shields only that conduct not violative of clearly established constitutional [or statutory] rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … clearly established constitutional principles.

Taylor v. LeBlanc

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 15, 2023

LeBlanc appeals the denial of qualified immunity arguing, inter alia, that his conduct wasn’t objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law. … Lambert, 921 F.3d 215, 219 (5th Cir. 2019) (qualified immunity turns on whether defendant’s conduct is “objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law”); Hinojosa v.

Joseph Zadeh v. Mari Robinson

928 F.3d 457 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 2, 2019

Clearly established law for qualified immunity To summarize, we have concluded there was a violation of Dr. Zadeh’s constitutional rights. … But owing to a legal deus ex machina—the “clearly established” prong of qualified-immunity analysis— the violation eludes vindication.

Rutha Carroll v. Harris County

800 F.3d 154 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 26, 2015

In the qualified-immunity context, we review only the “purely legal question whether a given course of conduct would be objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” … The court held that the use of force was excessive, but concluded that, as of 2004, the law was not clearly established and granted qualified immunity. Id. at 448.

Brandie Cunningham v. Wood County

983 F.3d 185 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 18, 2020

Citing factual disputes, and holding that Cunningham’s right to a name-clearing hearing was clearly established, the district court denied qualified immunity on summary judgment. … Qualified immunity’s clearly established prong was met, the district court reasoned, because Wisconsin v. Constantineau, 400 U.S. 433 (1971), and Bledsoe v.

Juarez v. Aguilar

666 F.3d 325 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 30, 2011

Appellants sought dismissal based on qualified immunity. … As long as the officials received fair notice that their conduct violated the litigant’s rights, the right was clearly established. See id.

Hampton v. Oktibbeha County Sheriff Dept.

480 F.3d 358 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 26, 2007

If the plaintiff fails to state a constitutional claim or if the defendant's conduct was objectively reasonable under clearly established law, then the government official is entitled to qualified immunity. … The officers instead argue that their actions were objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law at the time of the events. 16 The district court declined to grant qualified immunity to any of the officers on

Morrow v. Meachum

917 F.3d 870 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 8, 2019

And qualified immunity applied in all five. Cases cutting both ways do not clearly establish the law. 3. … Some courts have suggested dicta can clearly establish the law for purposes of qualified immunity.

Geter v. Fortenberry

849 F.2d 1550 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 26, 1988

Qualified immunity shields only that conduct not violative of clearly established constitutional [or statutory] rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … immunity defense if he procures false identification by unlawful means or deliberately conceals exculpatory evidence, for such activity violates clearly established constitutional principles.

Karen Jo Barrow v. Greenville Independent School District, Herman Smith, Dr.

332 F.3d 844 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 2, 2003

Herman Smith, on the ground of qualified immunity, and certified it as final. 1 We reverse. … The district court determined that Barrow had failed to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right in 1998 and that Smith was therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

Hare v. City of Corinth, Miss.

135 F.3d 320 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 12, 1998

B. 39 The second prong of the qualified immunity test is better understood as two separate inquiries: whether the allegedly violated constitutional rights were clearly established at the time of the incident; and, if so, … Jones, 515 U.S. 304, 314 , 115 S.Ct. 2151, 2156 , 132 L.Ed.2d 238 (1995)). 54 Accordingly, for this appeal on qualified immunity, the subjective deliberate indifference standard serves only to demonstrate the clearly established

Joseph Zadeh v. Mari Robinson

902 F.3d 483 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 31, 2018

Requirement of clearly established law for qualified immunity We have concluded that there was a violation of Dr. Zadeh’s constitutional rights. … But owing to a legal deus ex machina—the “clearly established law” prong of qualified-immunity analysis—the violation eludes vindication.

Tammy Cass v. City of Abilene

814 F.3d 721 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 24, 2016

Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability in their individual capacity to the extent that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. Trent v. … Appellants’ entire argument on this second prong of the qualified immunity test is that “it is clearly established in the law that citizens are protected against unjustified, excessive police force.”

Tuttle v. Sepolio

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

Federal qualified immunity does not apply to state-law claims, see Brown v. … 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

Tuttle v. Sepolio

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

Federal qualified immunity does not apply to state-law claims, see Brown v. … 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

Duru v. City of Houston

30 F.3d 1494 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 22, 1994

Cary King v. Louisiana Tax Commission

821 F.3d 650 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 6, 2016

To establish that qualified immunity does not apply, the Kings must prove Handorf “[(1)] violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct … In the present case, Handorf is entitled to qualified immunity unless it was clearly established that what he did was a violation of the Kings’ Fourth Amendment rights. Morgan, 659 F.3d at 371.

Rogers v. Hall

46 F.4th 308 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 19, 2022

Thus, the district court held that Rogers failed to establish that the defendants’ conduct violated clearly established law, and therefore failed to rebut the defendants’ qualified immunity defense to his claim. … violate clearly established law.”

Kenneth Craig Brady v. Fort Bend County, R. George Molina

58 F.3d 173 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 25, 1995

Furthermore, the Fifth Circuit does not permit Sheriff Molina to refer to the views of the other circuits to establish that these prohibitions were not “clearly established.” … “Our inquiry [into what is clearly established law] ends, if we find from examining the decisions of the Supreme Court and our own decisions that the law was clearly established in this circuit.” Boddie v.

Foley Bey v. Prator

53 F.4th 854 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 17, 2022

immunity defense alters the usual summary judgment burden of proof” because the plaintiff, to overcome qualified immunity, “must rebut the defense by establishing a genuine [dispute of material fact] as to whether … the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law.”