Case law

Claudine L. Boyce, Also Known as Marilyn Boyce v. Vera Fernandes and City of Peoria, Illinois

77 F.3d 946 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 26, 1996

Where the only issue bearing on immunity is whether the defendant had probable cause to make the search or arrest that is challenged, merits and immunity merge; the dispositive question is simply whether the defendant did … The fact that in the end Boyce was not prosecuted does not establish the absence of probable cause, and not only because the legal standard and the evidentiary requirements for probable cause are more stringent at the preliminary

Paine v. Cason

678 F.3d 500 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 17, 2012

Purtell v. Mason

527 F.3d 615 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 14, 2008

Qualified-immunity claims are determined by reference to the two-part inquiry established in Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001). … The plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating the violation of a clearly established right. Forman v.

Lojuk v. Johnson

770 F.2d 619 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 8, 1985

and qualified immunity. … Plaintiff argued in the alternative that even if defendants had not violated clearly established constitutional rights, they should be denied qualified immunity because they had violated a state administrative regulation.

Kompare v. Stein

801 F.2d 883 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 4, 1986

violate clearly established rights. … Any doubt as to whether the prosecution was without probable cause must be *892 resolved in favor of the defendant because she has qualified immunity unless she violated a clearly established right.

Steven Manning v. Gary Miller, Federal Bureau of Investigation Agent, and Robert Buchan, Federal Bureau of Investigation Agent

355 F.3d 1028 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 21, 2004

Similarly, Manning is able to meet the second prong of the qualified immunity test: his constitutional due process right was “clearly established” at the time he asserts it was violated. … established at that time, Agents Buchan and Miller cannot prevail on their qualified immunity claim.

Nicholas Narducci v. Gregory Moore

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 9, 2009

The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from lawsuits for damages when their conduct did not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Here, because defendants argue that Narducci’s Fourth Amendment rights were not violated and that the violation of this right was not “clearly established,” we will consider both issues in turn. A.

Kompare v. Stein

801 F.2d 883 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 4, 1986

The question on appeal is whether the defendants' qualified immunity protects them from suit, or more specifically, whether the defendants violated clearly established constitutional rights by allegedly violating a county … Qualified immunity shields 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 would have known

Peggy Kelley v. Mark Myler, Gene Patrick, Ralph Bell and Hurricane Foods, Inc.

149 F.3d 641 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 13, 1998

The court also found that because the arrest was reasonable, the officers did not violate any clearly established constitutional rights, and thus were entitled to qualified immunity for their actions. … Whether a defendant is entitled to a qualified immunity defense depends on the objective legal reasonableness of the defendant’s actions assessed in light of clearly established law.

United States v. Granvel E. Windom

19 F.3d 1190 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 24, 1994

Windom’s concern that his memory might have faded “is insufficient to *1196 establish that the delay impaired his defense.” Brock, 782 F.2d at 1447 . … Clearly, in light of the prevailing standard in this circuit, the evidence was sufficient to support Windom’s conviction on Count Seven. 2.

Akande v. Grounds

555 F.3d 586 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 9, 2009

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages where their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … “clearly established” at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.

Whitaker v. Wisconsin Department of Health Services

849 F.3d 681 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 27, 2017

We agree with the district court that Whita- ker failed to establish that she was an “otherwise qualified” employee, as required by the Rehabilitation Act, and we af- firm the grant of summary judgment. I. … Since Whitaker failed to establish that she was an “other- wise qualified” employee, we need not address whether she properly requested an accommodation, or whether her ac- commodation request was reasonable.

White v. City Of Markham

310 F.3d 989 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 13, 2002

Qualified Immunity 7 The plaintiffs contend that the district court erred in dismissing the claims against Officer Muldrow and Chief Lymore based on qualified immunity. … The plaintiffs bear the burden of establishing the existence of a clearly established constitutional right. See Rakovich v.

William J. Elliott v. William Thomas, Barbara Propst v. Morton W. Weir

937 F.2d 338 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 4, 1991

Qualified immunity, we know from Mitchell , establishes a right not to be tried. When rules of law clearly establish public officials’ duty, the immunity defense is unavailable. … By sleight of hand you can turn any defense on the merits into a defense of qualified immunity.

Harold E. Sonnleitner v. Stanley York, Joann O'connor, Kathleen Bellaire, Kathy Karkula and Joe Leann

304 F.3d 704 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 12, 2002

However, under the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, Sonnleitner has failed to establish that this right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … The individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because Sonn-leitner has failed to carry his burden of establishing the existence of a clearly established constitutional right to a pre-de-motion hearing as to

Steidl v. Fermon

494 F.3d 623 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 18, 2007

established” constitutional law and preclude the defendants from proffering a qualified immunity defense. … II The Supreme Court has established a two-step analysis for assessing claims of qualified immunity. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

Gary Orlowski v. Milwaukee County, Wisconsin

872 F.3d 417 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 18, 2017

Defendants Not Entitled to Qualified Immunity The first question we must address is whether Alexander and Manns (“Defendants”) are entitled to qualified immun- ity. … Manns that could impact qualified immunity analysis.

Sallenger, Mary v. Oakes, Brian

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 10, 2007

If the right was clearly estab- lished, the government actor is not entitled to qualified immunity. … If the right was not clearly established, the officers are still entitled to qualified immunity.

Daniel Jackson v. Shawn Curry

888 F.3d 259 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 19, 2018

That decision itself does not involve a pure legal issue regarding qualified immunity, i.e., whether the officers violated Jackson’s clearly established constitutional rights. … plausibly violated clearly established rights.

United States v. John Hardimon

700 F.3d 940 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 7, 2012

The judge had already asked him whether he could think clearly, and he had said he could, which implies that he didn’t think his medications were affecting his ability to think clearly. … Not being a psychiatrist, the judge could not use dosage information to infer inability to think clearly.