Case law

Drew Parsons v. City of Ann Arbor, Mich.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 12, 2023

Kandt argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity, which protects government officials “from civil-damages liability for violations of ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.’” … A government official is entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff can establish that “(1) the facts show a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) the right at issue was clearly established when the event

Bible Believers v. Wayne County

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 28, 2015

However, I would hold that Deputy Chiefs Richardson and Jaafar are entitled to qualified immunity because the right at issue was not clearly established at the time of the 2012 Arab International Festival. … Qualified Immunity Bible Believers’ damages claim against the officers in their individual capacities should fail under qualified immunity because there was, and still remains, no clearly established law pertaining

Robert Chappel v. Montgomery County Fire Protection District No. 1

131 F.3d 564 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 14, 1997

In the alternative, they have also argued that, even if Chappel's speech was protected, they are entitled to qualified immunity because this protection was not clearly established. … Rather, if the contours of the right alleged to have been violated were clearly established, the defense of qualified immunity should ordinarily fail. Dickerson, 101 F.3d at 1158.

Cory Jarvela v. Richard Houk

40 F.4th 761 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 22, 2022

App’x 391 (6th Cir. 2013) does not establish that proposition either—not least because unpublished decisions do not “clearly establish” anything. See Bell v. Johnson, 308 F.3d 594, 611 (6th Cir. 2002).) … More briefly, we hold that Houk is entitled to qualified immunity for his actions during what we call the contact phase.

Robert Stern v. Kenneth Shouldice

706 F.2d 742 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 15, 1983

entitled to qualified immunity. … The Supreme Court recently modified the qualified immunity test in Harlow v.

King v. City of Eastpointe

86 F. App'x 790 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 4, 2003

“A government official who performs discretionary functions is entitled to qualified immunity from civil suits for damages arising out of the performance of his official duties unless his alleged conduct violated clearly … We have recently set forth the standard for determining when qualified immunity is appropriate: Qualified immunity involves a three-step inquiry.

Charles Selby v. Patricia Caruso

734 F.3d 554 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 31, 2013

The defendants argue they are entitled to summary judgment on this claim because they are protected by qualified immunity. … Because Selby satisfies both requirements for overcoming the qualified immunity defense, summary judgment is not appropriate.

Selden Apartments v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development

785 F.2d 152 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 7, 1986

Plaintiff is not required, however, to prove that it is more qualified than the firm which was selected to receive the property. … During the trial, the district court clearly followed the procedure of proof required by McDonnellBurdine, it simply did not instruct the jury on the entire process. This is the proper approach under Aikens .

Lustig v. Mondeau

211 F. App'x 364 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 8, 2006

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions [ ] generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Turning to the second step in the qualified immunity analysis, the question is whether the right to be free from excessive force under these circumstances was clearly established such that “it would be clear to a reasonable

Haverstick Enterprises, Inc. v. Financial Federal Credit, Inc.

32 F.3d 989 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 19, 1994

The affirmative defense of qualified immunity provides that: 17 government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … In the pending case, H.E.I. enjoyed a clearly established right not to have property in which it enjoyed a lawful possessory interest seized 4 by state action in violation of the constitution.

Nixon v. Belmont-Harrison Juvenile District

113 F. App'x 51 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 7, 2004

; (3) dismissing his Section 1983 retaliation claim against defendant Oprisch; and (4) holding that defendant Oprisch is entitled to qualified immunity. … See also, Ernst, 379 F.3d 373, 377 (noting that the burden of establishing Eleventh Amendment immunity is on the party asserting it, and such immunity is to be considered as an affirmative defense to jurisdiction.)

Alan Miller v. Sanilac County

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 4, 2010

But under § 1983, an arresting agent is entitled to qualified immunity if he or she could reasonably (even if erroneously) have believed that the arrest was lawful, in light of clearly established … This right was “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes at the time of Miller’s arrest. Id. at 401.

Hayes v. City of Mt. Washington

43 F. App'x 838 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 6, 2002

In any event, the district court did not err in finding that these facts were sufficient to provide qualified immunity to Hayes. … Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages as long as “‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

Hughlett v. Romer-Sensky

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 6, 2006

Qualified Immunity On appeal, plaintiffs claim that the district court erred when if found that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity, because plaintiffs’ allegations establish statutory and constitutional … Officials who perform discretionary functions are generally entitled to qualified immunity from individual liability for civil damages so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

William W. Jones v. William Perrigan

459 F.2d 81 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 26, 1972

The immunity of law enforcement officers from false arrest liability is a qualified one, in the nature of an affirmative defense. Immunity is available only if the officer acted in good faith with probable cause. … The mere fact that Perrigan was an FBI agent does not per se establish his immunity from the claim of Jones. Fine v. Paramount Pictures, Inc., 171 F.2d 571, 574 (7th Cir. 1948).

Horace v. Curry v. Fred Gillette

461 F.2d 1003 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 14, 1972

The defenses of good faith action and qualified immunity interposed by the remaining defendants are not available to Marsh, and since we conclude the District Judge’s findings of fact not to be clearly erroneous, the judgment … However, a determination that the remaining defendants acted in good faith in the premises could provide a defense under the doctrine of qualified governmental immunity. Pierson v.

Juli Garretson v. City Of Madison Heights

407 F.3d 789 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 27, 2005

to qualified immunity. … legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken."

Simasko v. County Of St. Clair

417 F.3d 559 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 3, 2005

of qualified immunity protects government officials who perform discretionary functions from civil liability "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Accordingly, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. 12 A.

Phyllis May, Administratrix of the Estate of Deborah Kirk, Deceased v. Franklin County Commissioners

437 F.3d 579 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 15, 2006

Officer Ratliff filed a motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity grounds, which the district court denied in part. We reversed the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to Ratliff. May v. … Moreover, we previously granted Ratliff qualified immunity for his actions in this matter, May, 59 Fed.Appx. at 794 , and plaintiff has settled her claims against the Franklin Township defendants.

Simasko v. County of St. Clair

417 F.3d 559 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 3, 2005

The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials who perform discretionary functions from civil liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Accordingly, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. A.