Case law

Stiles ex rel. D.S. v. Grainger County

819 F.3d 834 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 25, 2016

None of the acts identified by Plaintiffs qualifies as an affirmative act that created or increased DS’s risk of danger. … Because there was no constitutional violation by any of the individual Defendants, we do not address the parties’ arguments regarding the defenses of qualified immunity and the statute of limitations.

Jessica Barefield v. Jacqueline Hillman

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 21, 2021

was clearly established at the time Hillman and Normant placed T.H. in Welbeck’s foster home. … a constitutional violation, we need not address the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity analysis.

Johnson v. Turner

125 F.3d 324 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 8, 1997

These judicial officers were clearly performing their statutory duty to establish paternity and enforce child support payments in a manner that was specifically authorized by statute. … Turner, 626 F.2d 1 , 5 & n. 11 (1980), clearly established the burden that plaintiffs such as Hill and Luellen are required to meet in order to have standing to request injunctive and declaratory relief.

Fanester James v. City of Detroit, Mich.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 23, 2021

Thus, she does not even attempt to carry her burden of showing that the law is clearly established. Ruffin v. Cuyahoga Cnty., 708 F. … In other words, “[t]he ultimate burden of proof is on [the] plaintiff to show that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity” after the defendants have affirmatively asserted qualified immunity first.

United States v. Edward B. Crouse

78 F.3d 1097 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 30, 1996

In October 1994, we reversed the downward departure, but affirmed the district court’s loss calculations as not clearly erroneous. Id. at 836-42 . … Crouse argues that the district court erred in applying the Kohlbach holding, because the court refused to consider whether Crouse’s “expansion of the record” established that he was qualified for a departure based on community

Kentucky ex rel. United Pacific Insurance v. Laurel County

805 F.2d 628 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 14, 1986

An interpleader proceeding does not establish jurisdiction: “The United States may not be required to interplead when it has not waived its sovereign immunity.” 7 C. Wright, A. Miller & M. … Defendants argue that they are immune from suit in this matter under the state constitutional law doctrine of sovereign immunity and under state common law.

Smith v. Parker

7 F. App'x 432 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 22, 2001

Clearly, pursuant to KSP regulations, Smith’s prohibited correspondence would have been rejected whether the mailroom clerks knew of Smith’s legal actions or not. 3 For the foregoing reasons, the district court’s judgment … As Smith’s claims are without merit, a qualified immunity inquiry is unnecessary.

Seth Taylor v. Davidson Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 26, 2020

They invoked qualified immunity, arguing that Taylor had failed to show whether or how each individual officer had violated his clearly established rights. … Each officer is immune from suit unless his specific conduct violated clearly established law. Id.

Michigan Interlock, LLC v. Alcohol Detection Sys., LLC

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 28, 2020

Second, Johnson is entitled to qualified immunity for the individual capacity claims because her conduct did not violate a constitutional right that was clearly established. … We begin with the second prong of the qualified immunity test: whether the constitutional rights at issue were clearly established.

Nuchols v. Berrong

268 F. App'x 414 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 6, 2008

The court also concluded that, even assuming a violation of Nuchols’s substantive due process rights, Berrong was entitled to qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established at the time of Berrong’s conduct … She also bears the burden of establishing that the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. Smoak v. Hall, 460 F.3d 768, 778 (6th Cir. 2006).

Sanford J. Berger v. City of Mayfield Heights

265 F.3d 399 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 7, 2001

Clearly, a district court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 to entertain such constitutional challenges. … We think that there can be little question that Berger qualifies as such.

Daniel Zavatson v. City of Warren, Mich.

714 F. App'x 512 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 31, 2017

Qualified Immunity (Federal Law) Notwithstanding the above analysis, qualified immunity protects officers from civil liability so long as they do not violate clearly established constitutional rights by engaging … In order to avail himself of governmental immunity, “the proponent of individual immunity must establish that he acted without malice.”

Dafinka Stojcevski v. Macomb County, Mich.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 17, 2020

And because the Deputies have invoked qualified immunity, the estate must prove that their specific conduct violated clearly established legal rules. See Arrington-Bey, 858 F.3d at 992. … When applying these general principles to this appeal, the parties all but agree on what qualifies as the clearly established law.

Fox v. Van Oosterum

176 F.3d 342 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 10, 1999

immunity on this claim because in the Sixth Circuit it was not clearly established in early 1994 (when Hartrum and Van Oosterum refused to return the driver's license to Fox) that a claim such as this one could be brought … Clearly established legal standards illustrate that a seizure does not necessarily begin and end at the moment the government deprives an individual of his personal property.

United States v. John Westine, Jr.

883 F.3d 659 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 26, 2018

But the test from Howey applies only to contracts that do not clearly qualify as securities by statute. See Nolfi, 675 F.3d at 546. … In this case, the “net royalty lease[s]” clearly qualify as securities under the Act because they are “certificates of interest or participation” in “any oil . . . royalty or lease.” See 15 U.S.C. § 78c(a)(10).

Logan Davis v. Jeremy Walleman

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 24, 2023

We review de novo a district court’s denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity. Chapman, 814 F.3d at 444. … clearly established,” and “a legal aspect of the district court’s factual determinations, such as whether the district court properly assessed the incontrovertible record evidence.” DiLuzio, 796 F.3d at 609.

25 Fair empl.prac.cas. 267, 25 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 31,593 Angus Brown v. Carl Neeb, Fire Fighters Local Union 92, Affiliated With the International Association Offire Fighters, Intervenor-Appellant

644 F.2d 551 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 3, 1981

In Sarabia, the municipal rule in question was eliminating qualified blacks from consideration for appointment to the police department. … In Teamsters, the Court held that a bona fide seniority system was immune to attack under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, even if it perpetuated past discrimination.

Jacqueline Gaines v. Denise Cross

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 27, 2026

The other mailer explicitly calls for voters to question whether Petrella, as “someone without children of her own” is qualified to “interview [voters’] children and decide their custody and visitation arrangements.” … In short, Gaines’s advertisements “clearly relate[] to [DR-Court] policies and . . . fit[] easily within the scope of the exception.” See Rose, 291 F.3d at 925.

Bruce Oran Cunningham v. Troy Packard

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 24, 2023

To defeat qualified immunity, Cunningham must show that (1) Sergeant Packard violated a constitutional right and (2) the right was clearly established. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009). … was clearly established.

Therese A. Farber v. Massillon Board of Education

917 F.2d 1391 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 11, 1990

Here the district court offered the following rationale for denial of appointment, approximately two years after the close of evidence: "... the evidence ... clearly established that there has been an atmosphere of distrust … The trial record does not support a finding that distrust and hostility were established, and the “administrators” are not named.