Case law

Joseph J. O'Brien v. City of Grand Rapids William Hegarty Daniel Ostapowicz

23 F.3d 990 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 18, 1994

Plaintiff O’Brien responds that his right to be free from an unreasonable search is clearly established and that defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity because no rational officer would have concluded that exigent … To determine whether qualified immunity protects Hegarty and Ostapowicz,' we must inquire: 1) whether O’Brien identified a clearly established right alleged to have been violated; and 2) whether a reasonable police officer

Occupy Nashville v. William Haslam

769 F.3d 434 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 8, 2014

the Plaza is not clearly established. … While qualified immunity can protect government officials for actions taken in the course of their duties, that protection is forfeited when an official’s conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional

Joseph Meadows v. City of Walker, Mich.

46 F.4th 416 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 18, 2022

We nonetheless held that qualified immunity was warranted because the rights were not clearly established where the officers could perceive at least some resistance, id. at 850, or the struggle was in progress. … Still, we granted qualified immunity because it was not “clearly established” that the officers’ use of force was excessive given that Stanfield “could reasonably have been perceived to be resisting.” Id. at 850.

Cullinan v. Abramson

128 F.3d 301 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 16, 1997

The grounds on which the defendants relied included both absolute immunity and qualified immunity. … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.

Arvil Hall v. Jon Shipley, Don Boles, Phillip Nall, and Sgt. Jack Mansfield

932 F.2d 1147 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 8, 1991

The right asserted by Hall was not so clearly established in this circuit as to defeat the officers’ claim of qualified immunity. … did acts which violate clearly established rights.

Parsons v. City of Pontiac

533 F.3d 492 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 22, 2008

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 law and the information … Detectives Martin and McKinney, however, are entitled to qualified immunity unless their actions “were objectively unreasonable in light of the clearly established right.” See id.

Ledura Watkins v. Robert Healy

986 F.3d 648 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 28, 2021

clearly established law. … qualified immunity that would attach.”

Adam Kanuszewski v. Mich. Dep't of Health & Human Servs.

927 F.3d 396 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 10, 2019

To overcome qualified immunity, Plaintiffs must show that "the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the defendant's alleged misconduct." Barker , 649 F.3d at 433 . … Thus, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because Plaintiffs have failed to show that "the right at issue was clearly established at the time of [their] alleged misconduct." Barker , 649 F.3d at 433 .

Dorsey v. Barber

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 21, 2008

such coercive measures had not been so clearly established by prior case law. … Haugen, 543 U.S. 194, 198-99 (2004) (making it clear that, to overcome qualified immunity, the right allegedly violated must be shown to have been clearly established in a particularized and relevant sense).

Zackery Beck v. Hamblen Cty., Tenn.

969 F.3d 592 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 10, 2020

A Qualified immunity shields a government official from money damages (and litigation) unless the official’s conduct violated a “clearly established” legal rule. Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232. … So Kingsley’s effect on Beck’s deliberate-indifference claim (if any) cannot qualify as “clearly established” law under the qualified-immunity test. See Wilson v. Layne, 526 U.S. 603, 618 (1999).

Jeffrey Clark v. Louisville-Jefferson Cnty. Metro Gov't

130 F.4th 571 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 7, 2025

And because the Supreme Court had clearly established Hardin’s Brady rights before 1992, the district court found that Thurman could not invoke qualified immunity for this constitutional violation. … Qualified immunity bars courts from imposing monetary liability on officers under § 1983 unless their conduct violated “clearly established” law. District of Columbia v.

Kevin R. Black v. Al C. Parke, Kenneth Case, Walt Chapleau, and Tom Campbell

4 F.3d 442 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 9, 1993

Defendants maintain that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the law is not so clearly established that they would have known that their conduct was unlawful. … However, if genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether the defendants actually did commit acts that would violate a clearly established right, then summary judgment on qualified immunity is improper. Poe v.

Gene Bell, Jr. v. City of Southfield, Mich.

37 F.4th 362 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 14, 2022

Officers are entitled to qualified immunity unless they (1) violated a constitutional right (2) that was “clearly established” at the time of the wrongdoing. Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232 (citation omitted). … After all, the qualified-immunity inquiry looks at whether a right has been clearly established.

Mingus v. Butler

591 F.3d 474 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 5, 2010

Qualified Immunity The district court’s denial of a claim of qualified immunity is immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine. Mitchell v. … Whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity depends upon whether the plaintiffs constitutional rights were violated and whether those rights were clearly established. See, e.g., Dorsey v.

Charles Jackson v. City of Cleveland

64 F.4th 736 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 6, 2023

clearly established law.” … Clearly Established Law We next consider the second prong of qualified immunity, which asks whether the right that has been violated was clearly established, meaning that “every ‘reasonable official would  No. 22

Solomon v. Auburn Hills Police

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 10, 2004

Kiefer, 310 F.3d 937, 944 (6th Cir. 2002) (recognizing that “right to be free from ‘excessively forceful handcuffing’ is a clearly established right for qualified immunity purposes”); Turek v. … Constitutional Right Clearly Established Once a potential violation of a plaintiff’s constitutional right has been established, we next decide whether that right was clearly established.

Robinson v. Bibb

840 F.2d 349 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 26, 1988

The question in this case is when does a judicial decision operate to strip a public official of good faith immunity by becoming “clearly established” law. … A police officer’s immunity is qualified, not absolute.

Russo v. City of Cincinnati

953 F.2d 1036 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 15, 1992

In response, all three officers assert qualified immunity. Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 , 87 S.Ct. 1213 , 18 L.Ed.2d 288 (1967), established that police officers enjoy qualified immunity from suits brought under § 1983. … overcome a qualified immunity claim.

Dennis O'Connor v. Rachael Eubanks

83 F.4th 1018 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 6, 2023

Qualified immunity protects Eubanks and Stanton unless “(1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time.” Dist. of Columbia v. … First, Vicory’s focus on individual liability supplies the wrong inquiry for qualified immunity. Under the “clearly established” prong, we should ask “what happened,” not “whom can you sue.”

Sharon L. Gragg v. Kentucky Cabinet For Workforce Development

289 F.3d 958 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 20, 2002

She must then demonstrate that this right was clearly established at the time of the infringement. … Whether the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on such a claim, however, is 5 To determine whether the claimed right under the Kentucky Constitution was clearly established, we would, of course, look to the law