Case law

United States v. Florencia Y. Walker (92-3135) and Tanya M. Powell (92-3136)

1 F.3d 423 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 23, 1993

Two trips to Japan were necessary to take the depositions because the witnesses refused to testify without grants of immunity. … The fact that she was less culpable than “organizers, leaders, managers or supervisors” does not establish that the defendant was a minor participant.

Gibson v. Matthews

926 F.2d 532 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 22, 1991

II We uphold the district court’s judgment in part because we believe that the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity under the doctrine established in Harlow v. … Ill We would uphold the district court even if qualified immunity was not available.

Estate of Bing Ex Rel. Bing v. City of Whitehall

456 F.3d 555 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 1, 2006

clearly established must be considered on a more specific level.” … Bing’s right not to endure a second flashbang device in these circumstances, however, was not “clearly established.” The Supreme Court has not clearly established such a right, nor has this court or other circuits.

Daniel Allen v. United States

83 F.4th 564 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 3, 2023

Why require Congress to speak clearly when it waives sovereign immunity? Because it is rarely the “legislative intention” to do so. United States v. Hoar, 26 F. Cas. 329, 330 (Story, Circuit Justice, C.C.D. … But see id. at 498 (Thomas, J., dissenting) (concluding that the “well-established rationale for construing a waiver in favor of the sovereign’s immunity . . . applies with equal force to the construction of an exception

Adkins v. Board Of Education Of Magoffin County

982 F.2d 952 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 5, 1993

She also contends that this right of association was clearly established in 1988, thus defeating Whitaker's claim of qualified immunity. … Once the Supreme Court has proclaimed the existence of a constitutional right, that right is "clearly established" for purpose of deciding a claim of qualified immunity. 28 The Supreme Court identified the constitutional

Jeffrey McKinley v. City of Mansfield

404 F.3d 418 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 11, 2005

But as a precursor to the Harlow qualified immunity analysis, a court must first determine whether any constitutional violation occurred, let alone the violation of a clearly established right. E.g., Saucier v. … The dissent suggests that Officer Fortney should be entitled to qualified immunity because we have established a “new right of action.”

Guest v. Leis

255 F.3d 325 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 2, 2001

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability, as well as from suit, if their official conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Qualified Immunity According to plaintiffs, “Defendants Leis, Hamilton County Sheriffs Department and RE Cl cannot assert qualified immunity” as “political subdivisions.” Guest Br. at 46.

Smith v. Stone

40 F. App'x 197 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 9, 2002

We review de novo a district court’s denial of qualified immunity. Klein, 275 F.3d at 550 . … It is well established “that government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Kwame Ajamu v. City of Cleveland

925 F.3d 793 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 20, 2019

Qualified immunity does not apply if (1) “on the plaintiff’s facts,” a constitutional violation occurred, and (2) the alleged violation was of “clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … At issue in this appeal is whether, in 1975, the constitutional rights allegedly violated by Stoiker were sufficiently clearly established to deprive him of the protection of qualified immunity.

Donald Machan v. Shawn Olney

958 F.3d 1212 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 14, 2020

We review de novo the district court’s denial of qualified immunity. Hayden, 640 F.3d at 153. … Determinations of qualified immunity require us to answer two questions: first, whether the officer violated a constitutional right; and second, whether that right was clearly established in light of the specific context

Chappel v. Montgomery County Fire Protection District No. 1

131 F.3d 564 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 14, 1997

In the alternative, they have also argued that, even if Chappel’s speech was protected, they are entitled to qualified immunity because this protection was not clearly established. … Rather, if the contours of the right alleged to have been violated were clearly established, the defense of qualified immunity should ordinarily fail. Dickerson, 101 F.3d at 1158.

Eugene D. ex rel. Olivia D. v. Karman

889 F.2d 701 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 13, 1989

Plaintiffs would be able to convert the rule of qualified immunity that our cases plainly establish into a rule of virtually unqualified liability simply by alleging violation of extremely abstract rights.... … The issue of qualified immunity is a question of law for the district court; thus, on appeal we consider the issue de novo.

Champion v. Outlook Nash Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 19, 2004

Conclusion Champion’s clearly established rights. … First, the district court properly denied the Officers’ Rule 50(b) motion for qualified immunity, because on a view of the facts in the light most favorable to the Plaintiffs, the Officers violated Champion’s clearly established

Mark Blackwell v. Lisa Nocerini

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 16, 2024

Did the complaint plausibly plead a clearly established violation of the First Amendment? … Clearly Established Law. A § 1983 plaintiff who seeks damages from a state actor for a First Amendment violation must show that the state actor violated a “clearly established” right. Reichle v.

Russo v. Cincinnati

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

Thus, the plaintiff must effectively pass two hurdles when facing a defendant on summary judgment who claims qualified immunity. First, the allegations must "state a claim of violation of clearly established law." … overcome a qualified immunity claim.

Doe v. City of Roseville

296 F.3d 431 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 19, 2002

Qualified Immunity 22 This is an interlocutory appeal of the denial of qualified immunity to each of the defendant school officials. … that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation."

Leary v. Livingston Cnty

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 10, 2008

To overcome a qualified-immunity defense in the setting of a constitutional tort, a plaintiff must establish (1) that the defendant violated a “constitutional right” and (2) that the right “was clearly established.” … 2) whether that right was clearly established.

Ashley Franklin v. Franklin Cnty., Ky.

115 F.4th 461 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 15, 2024

“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 of which a reasonable person … Because Franklin does not adequately allege a constitutional violation by Culbertson, and because addressing her claim is more straightforward on that basis, we need not reach the “clearly established” prong of the qualified-immunity

Haskell v. Washington Township

864 F.2d 1266 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 20, 1988

There are two types of immunities available to persons performing certain governmental functions: absolute and qualified. See Owen v. … Officials performing traditionally executive or administrative discretionary functions, however, are entitled to only qualified immunity and are entitled to immunity only if they can establish that the actions were within

Williams v. Bass

63 F.3d 483 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 29, 1995

Williams cross-appeals the court’s order granting defendants qualified immunity. … Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiffs rights were so clearly established at the time the acts were committed that officials in the defendants’ position, measured objectively, would have clearly