Case law

Rosa Carter, Administratrix of the Estate of Adrian Miles Carter, Deceased, Cross-Appellee v. City of Chattanooga, Tennessee, Cross-Appellant

850 F.2d 1119 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 27, 1988

If it did not overrule a clearly established precedent in the Supreme Court, Tennessee v. … Garner) constituted a departure from clearly established prior precedent or law.

Amanda Landis v. Jason Baker

297 F. App'x 453 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 16, 2008

Qualified immunity provides that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … Clearly established right.

Savoie v. Martin

673 F.3d 488 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 6, 2012

In retrospect, Judge Martin probably should have recused himself because of his prior involvement in this clearly contested custody dispute. … “To establish deliberate indifference, the plaintiff ‘must show prior instances of unconstitutional conduct demonstrating that the [employer] has ignored a history of abuse and was clearly on notice that the training in this

D. Sreedharan Nair v. Oakland County Community Mental Health Authority and William J. Allen

443 F.3d 469 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 4, 2006

Kentucky, 314 F.3d 262, 265 (6th Cir.2002) (“We must therefore address the jurisdictional [Eleventh Amendment] question that clearly exists, even though it was not addressed by the court below.”); Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish … After all, Steel Co.’s rule is premised on a court’s lack of power to reach the merits without establishing its jurisdiction.

Dana Little v. City of Owensboro, Ky.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 29, 2026

This test mirrors the objective reasonableness standard of the qualified immunity analysis above, see id., which here yielded the conclusion that Officer Dunn did not violate Ms. Little’s clearly established rights. … The second part of the qualified immunity inquiry asks whether “the right was clearly established.” Raimey, 77 F.4th at 447 (citation modified).

Cynthia Brown v. David Yost

103 F.4th 420 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 29, 2024

Notably, the proposed amendment states that government actors may not rely on qualified immunity, sovereign immunity, prosecutorial immunity, and any other immunity available to the state and its employees in actions filed … Ohio’s interests are clearly defined and well established: “states have a strong interest in ‘ensuring that its elections are run fairly and honestly,’ as well as in ‘maintaining the integrity of its initiative process.’”

F. Dennis Alerding v. Ohio High School Athletic Association

779 F.2d 315 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 17, 1985

The Privileges and Immunities Clause was intended to establish "a norm of comity" among the various states, Baldwin v. … Even more damaging and clearly fatal to appellants' argument are the most recent Supreme Court cases of Camden and Piper which, as discussed above, clearly require and emphasize consideration of the fundamentality of the

Scott Osborn v. City of Columbus, Ohio.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 15, 2023

Excessive Force Claim Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages so long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … plaintiff’s constitutional rights, and (2) the right was clearly established and one of which a reasonable officer would have known.

In Re Dsc, Ltd., a Michigan Corporation, Debtor. Riverview Trenton Railroad Company Crown Enterprises, Inc. v. Dsc, Ltd., a Michigan Corporation

486 F.3d 940 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 23, 2007

that they are qualified under § 303(b)(1). … THE BANKRUPTCY COURT DID NOT ERR IN ESTABLISHING AND ENFORCING ITS JOINDER DEADLINE.

T.M. v. Richard DeWine

49 F.4th 1082 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 28, 2022

On the merits, the district court concluded that there is a single set of federal eligibility requirements under Title IV-E for caregivers in Ohio to qualify for FCMPs. … So “approve” is best read as a catch-all for states that use different terminology, but that doesn’t change the fact that the same standards must be met to qualify for FCMPs.

Pigram Ex Rel. Pigram v. Chaudoin

199 F. App'x 509 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 5, 2006

Therefore, qualified immunity is not available for lack of a “clearly established” right. See Saucier, 533 U.S. at 200. … established” under Sixth Circuit law for purposes of qualified immunity.

Sherrell King v. City of Lincoln Park, Mich.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 5, 2025

Kosmalski first argues that he did not violate a clearly established constitutional right when he handcuffed King and should thus be protected by qualified immunity. … In my opinion, Officer Kosmalski is entitled to qualified immunity because, at a minimum, King has failed to meet her burden of establishing that any violation of her constitutional rights was clearly established.

Brian Menge v. Khursheed Ash-Shafii

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 8, 2026

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from suit unless those officials (1) violated a constitutional right that (2) was clearly established when the conduct occurred.” Johnson v. … Ash-Shafii clearly established” and at a minimum “strongly suggests that qualified immunity applies.” Stockdale, 979 F.3d at 507 (emphasis omitted).

MSI Regency Ltd. v. Alvin Jackson

433 F. App'x 420 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 12, 2011

Though case law often speaks of qualified immunity in terms of whether a “clearly established” right was violated, this is sometimes misleading. … It is obvious at this stage that qualified immunity applies to protect the Defendants from damages because not only did they not violate a “clearly established law” — they violated no law at all.

James Legenzoff v. Michael Steckel

564 F. App'x 136 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 23, 2014

If a court determines that a constitutional right is not “clearly established,” the court need not *141 make out a constitutional violation for qualified immunity to apply. Id. 1. … The Unlawful Arrest Claim We begin with the second prong of the qualified immunity test, whether the constitutional rights at issue were “clearly established.” Id.

Alia v. Michigan Supreme Court

906 F.2d 1100 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 22, 1990

The individual justices did not raise the defense of qualified immunity in the district court, which dismissed the case on this basis sua sponte. … I would also remand this case for further consideration by the district court as to whether it can properly consider a defense of qualified immunity, when only absolute judicial immunity or Eleventh Amendment immunity has

Rafael Correa v. James Simone, Jr.

528 F. App'x 531 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 12, 2013

To determine whether qualified immunity applies to excessive force claims, this Court uses a two-step analysis. … Clearly Established Right. Having found a constitutional violation, we must next consider whether “the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” Campbell, 700 F.3d at 786 (citing Parsons v.

Thomas v. Cohen

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 31, 2006

immunity. … A divided panel of this court concluded that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity with respect to the Fourth Amendment claim, but that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity with respect to the Fourteenth

Carter v. United States

110 F. App'x 591 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 14, 2004

The burden of establishing timeliness such that her suit is not precluded by the sovereign immunity of the United States falls on Carter. We conclude that Carter has failed to carry this burden. … Here, in contrast, the letter clearly worked to Carter’s detriment. She had an unexpired claim which she allowed to expire believing that she had until April 18, 2001, to file.

Mike Pop v. Brookfield Chrysler Dodge Jeep, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 2, 2025

Second, the deputies claimed that even if there was an unconstitutional search and seizure, it was not clearly established, and they were therefore entitled to qualified immunity. … Because we hold that Pop’s complaint fails to allege a violation of a clearly established right, the deputies are entitled to qualified immunity. See Pearson v.