Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersca6

10,000+ results

0.38s

  • DeShawn Anderson-Santos v. Kent County, Mich.

    94 F.4th 550 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 29, 2024

    Page 7 clearly-established constitutional violation based on his version of the facts, fails to present us with a legal issue and relegates his claim to a factual dispute over which we cannot exercise jurisdiction. … of clearly established law.”

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Blake v. Wright

    179 F.3d 1002 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 15, 1999

    Alternatively, the majority opinion may imply that the district court in Mitchell could not reach the qualified immunity question because the law with respect to Title III was clearly established, not because qualified immunity … We fail to see the logic of providing a defense of qualified immunity to protect public officials from personal liability when they violate constitutional rights that are not clearly established and deny them qualified immunity

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Robert Sean Reed v. Campbell Cnty., Ky.

    80 F.4th 734 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 30, 2023

    Clearly Established Inquiry To satisfy the second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis, the officers’ unconstitutional conduct must violate clearly established law. Williams, 9 F.4th at 437. … Page 21 First, cases where we have found qualified immunity cannot clearly establish a constitutional violation by negative inference.

    Cited 39 timesPublished
  • Michael Charles Ward v. Dennis Dyke Fred Christians Robert J. Mayer Sherry Burt, Dan Bolden Donald Houseworth Robert Brown, Jr. David Haskell, Warden

    58 F.3d 271 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 29, 1995

    Defendants contend that Ward has failed to allege the violation of a clearly established right. … Therefore, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. 4 IV. For the reasons set forth above, we REVERSE the district court’s denial of qualified immunity. 1 .

    Cited 127 timesPublished
  • Mark Campbell v. Cheatham County Sheriff's Dep't

    47 F.4th 468 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 29, 2022

    Therefore, we turn to whether the right was clearly established. 3 An officer is not entitled to qualified immunity if he violates a constitutional right … “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

    Cited 38 timesPublished
  • Harrill v. Blount County

    55 F.3d 1123 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 31, 1995

    A violation of a clearly established state law can only surmount qualified immunity if it embodies the federal right that is the basis of the § 1983 action. Davis v. … Thus, the defendants did not violate the plaintiff’s clearly established federal rights, and therefore they have qualified immunity from plaintiffs § 1983 claims.

    Cited 44 timesPublished
  • Turner v. Scott

    119 F.3d 425 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 16, 1997

    Turner, does not establish a prima facie case against Officer Scott, then Officer Scott is entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law. … The issue on a claim of qualified immunity is not solely whether the right alleged to be violated was clearly established.

    Cited 327 timesPublished
  • Thomas L. Feathers Kathleen Feathers v. William Aey J.P. Donohue, City of Akron

    319 F.3d 843 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 13, 2003

    The district court refused to grant the officers qualified immunity, ruling that the officers violated Thomas Feathers’s (“Feathers”) clearly established rights to *846 be free from an unreasonable seizure and to be free … Federal appellate courts have jurisdiction to hear interlocutory appeals concerning “the legal question of qualified immunity, i.e., whether a given set of facts violates clearly established law.” Mattox v.

    Cited 311 timesPublished
  • David M. Mumford v. Joseph Zieba, Judge, in His Official and Individual Capacities Lorain County Common Pleas Court, Domestic Relations Division

    4 F.3d 429 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 1, 1993

    Moreover, Judge Zieba argued that he was protected from personal liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established on January 3, 1989 that a chief referee of a domestic relations … Steingut, 829 F.2d 317 (2d Cir.1987), granted state officials qualified immunity when they refused to reappoint a plaintiff to the position of workers’ compensation referee because federal law was not clearly established

    Cited 76 timesPublished
  • Nita Gordon v. Keith Bierenga

    20 F.4th 1077 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 14, 2021

    Under the familiar test for qualified immunity, a public official is immune from suit unless the plaintiff establishes: (1) a constitutional violation; and (2) that the right at issue was “clearly established” when the event … Even when a defendant violates a plaintiff’s constitutional rights, the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless the right at issue was “clearly established[.]” Id. (citing Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232).

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • Ronald Mitchell v. Justin Schlabach

    864 F.3d 416 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 3, 2017

    Second, was the right, clearly established at the time of the violation?” Id. Government officials are protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity unless the answer to both questions is yes. See id. *421 A. … at the time he acted. 3 We hold that they were not, The Supreme Court very recently reminded the lower courts that an officer’s actions are against “clearly established” law for purposes of qualified immunity only when “

    Cited 54 timesPublished
  • Cody Jones v. City of Elyria, Ohio

    947 F.3d 905 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 17, 2020

    Standard Of Review For Qualified Immunity. Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil liability for official acts that do not violate clearly established constitutional rights. Walker v. … As this collection of rights is clearly established, the two officers are not entitled to qualified immunity for the wrongful-arrest claim. b. Mitchell.

    Cited 52 timesPublished
  • Gray v. Detroit City

    Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 1, 2005

    Officer Gross is Entitled to Qualified Immunity This Court has adopted a three step analysis in determining when qualified immunity applies. Champion v. … Officer Gross is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. B.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brannum Ex Rel. Brannum v. Overton County School Board

    516 F.3d 489 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 20, 2008

    Under the qualified immunity doctrine, public officials cannot be held liable for violating a person’s constitutional rights unless the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged improper conduct. … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 , 107 S.Ct. 3034 , 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987), the Supreme Court articulated the meaning of “clearly established” in the context of the defense of qualified immunity: The contours of the right must be sufficiently

    Cited 43 timesPublished
  • Howard Linden v. City of Southfield, Mich.

    75 F.4th 597 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 26, 2023

    And for qualified immunity purposes, any lack of clarity in Willis would only support the First Responders’ position that Linden has failed to identify a “clearly established” right. Sumpter, 868 F.3d at 480. … Unpublished cases cannot clearly establish law for purposes of qualified immunity. See Bell v. City of Southfield, 37 F.4th 362, 367 (6th Cir. 2022).

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Angela Bouggess v. McKenzie Mattingly

    482 F.3d 886 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 16, 2007

    The Supreme Court has held that defendants in such suits are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … In other words, an officer will be denied qualified immunity if he violates a statutory or constitutional right that was “so clearly established when the acts were committed that any officer in the defendant’s position, measured

    Cited 104 timesPublished
  • Jorden Brown v. Samuel Giles

    95 F.4th 436 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 5, 2024

    Officer Giles argues he’s entitled to qualified immunity. To overcome that immunity, Brown must show it’s clearly established that tasing him in this particular context was excessive. See Pearson v. … Qualified immunity demands no such thing. Regardless, the relevant law is clearly established here.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Tyron Brown v. Lee Lucas

    753 F.3d 606 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 28, 2014

    On this score, appellees are entitled to qualified immunity. Whatever rights appellants had to receive exculpatory evidence prior to entering their pleas was not clearly established. … in light of the clearly established constitutional rights.' ” Feathers v.

    Cited 568 timesPublished
  • Deborah Audra Skousen v. Brighton High School, Paul Rambo, a Michigan State Trooper

    305 F.3d 520 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 26, 2002

    We do, however, retain jurisdiction over the legal question of qualified immunity, which requires a determination of whether a given set of facts violates a clearly established right. Mat-tox, 183 F.3d at 519 . … all, and then must determine whether the claimed right was clearly established, before proceeding to the qualified immunity question).

    Cited 249 timesPublished
  • Morrison v. Board of Trustees of Green Tp.

    583 F.3d 394 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 8, 2009

    This right was “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes at the time of Amanda’s seizure on October 30, 2002. See id. at 641 . … Violation of Clearly Established Right Officer Celender finally argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity, even if he *408 violated Amanda’s constitutional rights, because it was not clearly established at the time

    Cited 242 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.