Case law

Shively v. Green Local School District Board of Education

579 F. App'x 348 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 27, 2014

Defendant school officials appeal the district court’s denial of their motion to dismiss on qualified immunity and state-law immunity grounds. … The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

Tony Jeffers, Cross-Appellee v. Debbie Heavrin Jefferson County, Kentucky, Cross-Appellants, Churchill Downs, Inc., City of Louisville

932 F.2d 1160 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 3, 1991

Telb, 831 F.2d 673, 676 (6th Cir.1987) (plaintiff required to show that rights were so clearly established that any reasonable officer would have clearly understood conduct vio *1166 lated those rights). … . -) that Heavrin may still have a qualified immunity defense if some reasonable officer could have thought that probable cause exists on these facts.

Smith v. Thornburg

136 F.3d 1069 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 13, 1998

Qualified Immunity Finally, there are issues pertaining to qualified immunity that must also be addressed. … When a defendant moves for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, the plaintiff must: 1) identify a clearly established right alleged to have been violated; and 2) establish that a reasonable officer in the defendant

Joseph L. Howard v. City of Beavercreek

276 F.3d 802 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 9, 2002

Thus, summary judgment is appropriate if a party who has the burden of proof at trial fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element that is essential to that party’s case. … Immunity Next, we consider the district court’s dismissal of Howard’s state law claims for damages based on Ohio’s municipal immunity statute.

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.

Regina McCormick v. Miami University

693 F.3d 654 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 10, 2012

Congress has established its own remedial scheme, through § 1983, to address state actors who violate the law. Id. at 733. … Since a public university qualifies as an arm of the state, see Johnson v.

Talitha Woody v. Chris Buckner

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 9, 2026

But she fails to address the defendants’ qualified-immunity defense. … Mattingly, 482 F.3d 886, 890–91 (6th Cir. 2007) (denying qualified immunity when an officer did not know the victim had a firearm); see also Pelton v.

Kenney v. Fox

232 F.2d 288 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 19, 1956

when American courts were established there. … He added that the highest court had held that the broadly expressed terms of the Civil Rights Act could not have been intended to deprive state legislators of their preexisting and well established complete immunity from

Carol A. Timmer v. Michigan Department of Commerce and Michigan Department of Civil Service, United States of America, Intervenor

104 F.3d 833 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 15, 1997

Accordingly, we find that Congress clearly intended through the Equal Pay Act to abrogate the States’ sovereign immunity from suit. b. … When Congress extended the Equal Pay Act to the States in 1974, it clearly intended to prohibit the States from establishing sex-based wage differentials. See supra part II.A.3.a.

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.

Ernst v. Roberts

379 F.3d 373 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 12, 2004

I. 16 Eleventh Amendment immunity bars federal courts from exercising jurisdiction 4 over a claim, 5 where the party asserting immunity establishes that immunity applies. 6 In burden allocation, as well as in other respects … City of Marine City, 336 F.3d 487 , 490 (6th Cir.2003) ("Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense shielding governmental officials from liability as long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

D.D. v. James Scheeler

645 F. App'x 418 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 14, 2016

of a clearly established constitutional right.” … argue that the right was not clearly established.

Ability Center of Greater Toledo v. City of Sandusky

385 F.3d 901 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 1, 2004

Ga rrett, 531 U.S. 356, 369 (2001) (“[T]he Eleventh Amendment does not extend its immun ity to units of local governm ent.”). Nos. 03-3277/3339 Ability Center et al. v. … For example, elimination of architectural barriers was one of the central aims of the Act, yet such barriers were clearly not erected with the aim or intent of excluding the handicapped.

William Lucier v. City of Ecorse

601 F. App'x 372 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 10, 2015

Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity for civil damages if their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Because a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding whether Defendants violated Plaintiff’s clearly established constitutional rights, Defendants are not entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity

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.

Brookings v. Clunk

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 18, 2004

not be immune for trying a criminal case, an act for which the probate judge clearly lacked all subject matter jurisdiction.”). … The availability of qualified immunity, a doctrine not mentioned by the majority, makes this unwarranted extension of the doctrine of absolute immunity as unnecessary as it is inappropriate.

Ronald Haley v. Elsmere Police Department

452 F. App'x 623 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 15, 2011

Finally, Markesbery correctly points out that the district court did not explicitly address the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity test. … ” to mean that the right was clearly established but the factual dispute still prevented a finding of qualified immunity.

Larry T. Wilson, and Cross-Appellant v. Thomas L. Beebe, and Cross-Appellee

743 F.2d 342 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 29, 1984

of state agents to follow established procedures. … Thus, Beebe’s reliance upon Fiser is clearly misplaced, since it is inapplicable to the immunity issue of this case.

David Cooper v. Montgomery Cty., Ohio

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 2, 2019

months was not clearly established. … “The qualified immunity doctrine 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 person

O'Bryan v. Holy See

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 24, 2008

Pechiney Ugine Kuhlmann, 853 F.2d 445 (6th Cir. 1988) (agreeing with the district court’s determination that the corporation in question could qualify for foreign sovereign immunity status because the majority owner of the … As previously noted by this court, the legislative history of FSIA clearly envisions a burden-shifting process: The burden will remain on the foreign state to produce evidence in support of its claim of immunity