Case law

Jay Gunasekera v. Dennis Irwin

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 8, 2009

established to defeat the defendants’ qualified immunity defense must wait until a factual record has been developed. … Page 5 clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity before a factual record had been developed.

Albert Jones v. Dan Bottom

85 F.4th 805 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 30, 2023

Qualified immunity shields officials from trial “unless their actions violate clearly established rights.” DiLuzio, 796 F.3d at 608. … A government official is entitled to qualified immunity unless the evidence would permit a reasonable juror to find that “(1) the defendant violated a constitutional right; and (2) the right was clearly established.”

Weaver v. Shadoan

340 F.3d 398 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 25, 2003

If a violation could be established, the second prong requires an examination of whether "the right was clearly established" at the time of the events at issue. Id. … Because Plaintiff did not satisfy the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis, we need not address whether the right was clearly established.

Leonard Hale, Individually and as Next Friend of Sean Lysher and Shanna Lysher Sean Lysher, a Minor Shanna Lysher, a Minor v. Scott Kart

396 F.3d 721 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 13, 2005

The district court dismissed all defendants save one on the basis of qualified immunity, or on other grounds. … cause and qualified immunity lacking if the inquiry is answered in another way.

Patrick Barrett v. Steubenville City Schools

388 F.3d 967 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 15, 2004

Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does "not violate clearly established statutory or … In accordance with these fundamental principles of law, Lucci cannot obtain qualified immunity by claiming that no clearly established right existed. III.

Frierson v. Goetz

99 F. App'x 649 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 19, 2004

We have used a three-part test to determine whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity. … known that his actions violated clearly established rights.

Leonard v. Robinson

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 2, 2007

Robinson has asserted the defense of qualified immunity. … “Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

Brotherton v. Cleveland

173 F.3d 552 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 14, 1999

Cleveland enjoyed qualified immunity in his personal capacity, see id. at *3; (2) Dr. … We do not decide whether EBAA enjoys qualified immunity. To the extent that the district court analogized from cases on qualified immunity, it erred.

Haskell v. Washington Township

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

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 … but are limited to qualified immunity for acts performed in good faith in performance of their official duty as they understood it.

Wendy Cockrun v. Berrien Cnty., Mich.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 15, 2024

We concluded that defendants failed to argue that the rights at issue were not clearly established and therefore forfeited the defense. Id. And in Watkins v. … of qualified immunity.”

Luis Antonio Martinez, Sr v. Wayne Cnty., Mich.

142 F.4th 828 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 23, 2025

A county official is entitled to qualified immunity from a § 1983 suit if either (1) his conduct did not violate a constitutional right or (2) that right was not clearly established at the time of the conduct. … Because the Martinez Family did not have a clearly established constitutional right to timely notice of Luis Jr.’s death to prevent decomposition of his body, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Dennis M. Wolfel, Cross-Appellant v. Herbert Bates, Gary Brown, Cross-Appellees

707 F.2d 932 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 3, 1983

Navarette, 434 U.S. 555, 562-63 , 98 S.Ct. 855, 859-60 , 55 L.Ed.2d 24 (1978), prison officials like Bates and Brown can be liable for damages only if the constitutional right they violated was “clearly established at the … These circumstances, in our view, gave the court below an ample basis for denying Bates and Brown the defense of qualified immunity.

Baranski v. Fifteen Unknown Agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms

452 F.3d 433 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 3, 2006

A government official is not entitled to qualified immunity if the plaintiff alleges facts that, if true, establish that the official violated the plaintiff's clearly established federal rights. Saucier v. … Groh in contrast contains a qualified immunity analysis and thus applied law clearly established at the time of the search. 3 See also FED. R. CRIM.

Alice G. Kelly Norman P. Kelly v. Great Seneca Financial Corp. Javitch, Block & Rathbone

447 F.3d 944 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 17, 2006

LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 , 103 S.Ct. 1108 , 75 L.Ed.2d 96 (1983), the Court noted once that “[t]he immunity of parties and witnesses from subsequent damages liability for their testimony in judicial proceedings was well established … No. 1, 171 F.3d 231, 234 (5th Cir.1999) (en banc) (“Parker immunity is an inapt description, for its parentage differs from the qualified and absolute immunities of public officials ....

Shawn Northrup v. City of Toledo Police Dep't

785 F.3d 1128 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 13, 2015

Qualified immunity protects the officers from this lawsuit if either of two things is true: The officers did not violate Northrup’s Fourth Amendment rights, or any such rights were not clearly established at the time of the … Unlike Officer Bright, Sergeant Ray is entitled to qualified immunity.

Mills v. City of Barbourville

389 F.3d 568 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 12, 2004

The doctrine of 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 … of probable cause is unreasonable, qualified immunity is not appropriate.

Ryohei Akima v. Caitlyn Peca

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 26, 2023

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials from suit where “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … An official’s qualified immunity defense is analyzed under a two-prong framework, asking whether the official violated a constitutional right, and, if so, whether the right was “clearly established at the time.” D.C. v.

Kathryn M. Waters v. City of Morristown, Tennessee Merlin E. Shuck, Individually and in His Official Capacity as a Morristown Alderman/morristown City Councilman Jerry Graham, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Lieutenant in the Morristown Police Department

242 F.3d 353 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 22, 2001

Shuck's actions fell outside the scope of § 1983 because they were not taken under color of state law, that Officer Graham was entitled to qualified immunity because he had acted reasonably and did not violate clearly established … Thus, the first step in any qualified immunity analysis is to determine whether a clearly established statutory or constitutional right has been violated.

Fitzpatrick v. City of Dearborn Heights

19 F. App'x 261 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 6, 2001

the official allegedly did was objectively unreasonable in light of the clearly established constitutional rights. … plaintiff constitute a violation of clearly established law” of which a reasonable person would have known.

Tapp v. Banks

1 F. App'x 344 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 10, 2001

“The key inquiry in analyzing a claim for qualified immunity is whether the defendant’s alleged conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Thus, in order to defeat a qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff must (1) allege that a violation of a clearly established law occurred and (2) present sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue as to whether the defendant