Case law

Joseph McAdam v. Matthew Warmuskerken

517 F. App'x 437 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 15, 2013

To overcome an officer’s claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must establish, first, that the officer violated a constitutional right and, second, that the right was “clearly established” at the time the officer acted … A single tasing violates a plaintiff’s clearly established rights if he is neutralized and is not resisting an officer’s efforts to restrain him.

Walter Codd v. Robert Brown, Jr. William Grant and Lorna Elkins

949 F.2d 879 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 22, 1991

The director clearly has the latitude to establish broad categories excluded from participation in the work-pass program. Plaintiff was provided a pre-termination hearing to contest his inclusion in that category. … He cannot legitimately contend *884 that his initial placement in the program, although in error, could not be rescinded by the state without violating clearly established constitutional or statutory rights, yet that is the

DeJuan Oliver v. Eric Buckberry

687 F. App'x 480 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 25, 2017

Buckberry moved for summary judgment in his favor, arguing that he was entitled to qualified immunity from suit. … clearly established at the time of the violation.

Consolidated Television Cable Service, Inc. v. The City Of Frankfort

857 F.2d 354 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 21, 1988

We agree. 34 The state action immunity doctrine was established in 1943 in Parker v. Brown, 317 U.S. 341 , 63 S.Ct. 307 , 87 L.Ed. 315 (1943). … United States, 471 U.S. 48 , 105 S.Ct. 1721 , 85 L.Ed.2d 36 (1985), had actually developed a two-prong test for state action immunity: 44 The first prong requires that the anti-competitive behavior derive from a clearly articulated

Lucille C. Place v. Mrs. Mary C. Shepherd

446 F.2d 1239 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 17, 1971

Plaintiff was made Chairman of a committee to determine the number and availability of all those local people who were qualified nurses, but not working as such. … However, we are not bound by allegations that are clearly unsupported and unsupportable, Sexton v. Barry, 233 F.2d 220 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 352 U.S. 870 , 77 S.Ct. 94 , 1 L.Ed.2d 76 ; Pauling v.

Brown v. Shaner

172 F.3d 927 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 15, 1999

Lovelace leave to file an amended complaint naming O'Hara in his individual capacity without prejudice to any motion by the defendant to dismiss the amended complaint on the grounds of qualified immunity or the statute of … However, the district court then considered and granted O'Hara's motion for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. 34 On appeal, this Court considered the relation back question only under Rule 15(c)(3), not

Gerald Jospeh Segler v. City of Detroit, Mich.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 17, 2024

City of Detroit existing at the time of the press conference did not clearly establish that Craig’s actions violated the Constitution. Qualified immunity thus protects him from suit. … So Segler again fails to show that existing caselaw clearly establishes his proposed rule. And Craig is again entitled to qualified immunity. One last point.

Nails v. Riggs

195 F. App'x 303 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 3, 2006

The district court interpreted the answer as asserting qualified immunity, even though the answer does not use magic words like “qualified immunity” or “clearly established constitutional right.” … Not clearly established.

Dan Withers v. City of Cleveland

640 F. App'x 416 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 13, 2016

Clearly Established Law In light of its holding that Zola committed no constitutional violation, the District Court did not reach the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity analysis, and the City of Cleveland … Garner, 471 U.S. at 3 , 105 S.Ct. 1694 , Because there are disputes of fact that relate directly to this issue, it appears that Zola cannot establish that he is entitled to qualified immunity based on the clearly established

Jones v. Fidelity & Columbia Trust Co.

73 F.2d 446 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 7, 1934

It is not so much the contention of the appellant that the amended statute is by its terms retroactive, or that if so it would be immune to an attack upon its validity, but rather that there were no vested rights inuring … Quite clearly those who had not furnished supplies, even though under contract to do so, could not under that language qualify as lienholders.

Cook v. Martin

148 F. App'x 327 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 27, 2005

In 2001, the Court established a two-part test for determining whether qualified immunity applies. Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201 (2001). … established.”

Preyor v. City of Ferndale

248 F. App'x 636 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 5, 2007

“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 … established at the time of Preyor’s death, we conclude that Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Bahaa Iswed v. Patricia Caruso

573 F. App'x 485 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 22, 2014

Qualified immunity “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 … the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.”

Triplett v. Connor

109 F. App'x 94 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 3, 2004

Even though Judge Connor may have been better advised to enlist the aid of a deputy, it has been long-established that it is a judge’s “obligation ... to ‘protect the sanctity and dignity of ... courtroom proceedings .... … See Johnson, 125 F.3d at 34 (“A judge acts in the clear absence of all jurisdiction only when the matter upon which he acts is clearly outside the subject matter of the court over which he presides.”). .

Fathiree Udin Ali v. Stephen Adamson

132 F.4th 924 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 28, 2025

Qualified immunity protects officials from damages liability if their conduct “does not violate clearly established . . . constitutional rights.” Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982). … Adamson did not violate Ali’s clearly established free-exercise rights.

Andrew Evans v. Mark Gordon

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 20, 2025

But it determined that the plaintiffs had adequately alleged a violation of clearly established law for the suspension-based due-process claim, and that a determination of the police-defendants’ entitlement to qualified … the officers’ conduct violated their clearly established constitutional rights. See Martinez v. Wayne County, 142 F.4th 828, 835 (6th Cir. 2025).

Joseph M. Popovich, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division, Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appellee, Cuyahoga County

227 F.3d 627 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 18, 2000

Title II of the ADA 52 As we have said, because it is clear that Congress satisfied the first prong of the abrogation exception by clearly and unequivocally stating its intent to abrogate Eleventh Amendment immunity under … [N]o one believes that the Equal Protection Clause establishes the disparate-impact and mandatory-accommodation rules found in the ADA. 69 Erickson v.

United States v. James P. Fitch

964 F.2d 571 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 20, 1992

We are unable to say that the district court’s determination was clearly erroneous. United States v. Barrett, 890 F.2d 855, 863 (6th Cir.1989). … If a breach of an immunity agreement is established, the available remedies are those specified in the agreement. Id.; United States v. Irvine, 756 F.2d 708, 710-12 (9th Cir.1985); United States v.

Bertha BOYD, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Matthew BAEPPLER; David Wilsman, Defendants-Appellants

215 F.3d 594 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 6, 2000

immunity, i.e., whether a given set of facts violates clearly established law.” … in fact’ ” violated “clearly established law” in taking the action he did.

Robert Wells v. City of Dearborn Heights

538 F. App'x 631 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 26, 2013

“Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly … Allowing an interlocutory appeal of a denial of qualified immunity on summary judgment protects an official’s qualified immunity from suit. See Moldowan v.