Case law

John Walker v. Dr. Ivy Benjamin, Dr. Adrian Feinerman, Dr. Ansar Ansari, Dr. Virgilio Pilapil, Pamela Dunbar and Vickie Rowland

293 F.3d 1030 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 18, 2002

Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability when performing discretionary functions so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … To overcome the defense of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show the deprivation of a constitutional right, and must also show that the right was clearly established at the time of the violation.

Rex Frederickson v. Tizoc Landeros

943 F.3d 1054 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 26, 2019

We therefore agree with the district court that Frederickson has presented sufficient evidence to defeat qualified immunity at this stage. *** The district court’s denial of qualified immunity … A view that lost in 2012 cannot have been clearly established in 2011.

Lois Millspaugh and Tina Dyson v. County Department of Public Welfare of Wabash County

937 F.2d 1172 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 15, 1991

Finessing the question whether the immunity should be qualified or absolute, the district judge held that Tucker would prevail under either standard. … The mothers contest this, pointing to a list of things it was clearly established that social workers should not do.

Kurt Beathard v. Larry Lyons

129 F.4th 1027 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 27, 2025

Allowing review of such or- ders is consistent with the goal of sparing a public official from the burden of defending a suit and standing trial when the right he is accused of violating was not clearly established at the … - ants were entitled to qualified immunity.

Belcher v. Norton

497 F.3d 742 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 15, 2007

“If the law did not put the officer on notice that his conduct would be clearly unlawful, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is appropriate.” Id. at 202, 121 S.Ct. 2151 ; see also Malley v. … Saucier also articulates a two-part inquiry for addressing qualified immunity claims.

Virginia Viilo v. Kevin Eyre

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 27, 2008

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages if their actions did not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … immunity, and (2) the issue appealed concerned not which facts the parties might be able to prove, but rather whether or not those facts showed a violation of clearly established law.

Wilson v. Kelkhoff

86 F.3d 1438 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 18, 1996

P. 12(b)(6), arguing that Wilson's complaint failed to state a claim because, among other things, Brown, Moore, and Wells were entitled to absolute or qualified immunity and Kelkhoff was entitled to qualified immunity. … The question of whether a particular constitutional right is clearly established is reviewed de novo. Maltby v.

Andrew F. Glick v. Jerome Koenig

766 F.2d 265 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 13, 1985

Glick could have overcome Poppy’s qualified immunity for any alleged impropriety relating to setting the trial date only by demonstrating that any constitutional rights that were violated “were clearly established at the … Glick failed to overcome Koenig’s qualified immunity by demonstrating that Koenig violated clearly established constitutional rights.

Daniel Engel v. Robert Buchan

710 F.3d 698 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 5, 2013

We also held that the agents were not protected by qualified immunity because the constitutional right in question was clearly established at the time of the events at issue in the case. … Qualified immunity “pro- tects 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

Ivan Hernandez v. Michael F. Sheahan

711 F.3d 816 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 1, 2013

Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or consti- tutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … No. 12-1941 right and (2) whether that constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Barichello v. McDonald

98 F.3d 948 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 16, 1996

On July 26, 1993, the defendants moved for partial summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. … Doe by Doe, 509 U.S. 312, 318 , 113 S.Ct. 2637, 2642 , 125 L.Ed2d 257 (1993), it is sufficient for the purposes of qualified immunity to conclude that no relevant constitutional right was clearly established.

Hammond v. Kunard

148 F.3d 692 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 11, 1998

The doctrine of qualified immunity generally shields officials who perform discretionary functions from liability for civil damages "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense should ordinarily fail because a reasonably competent officer should know the law governing his conduct.

Johnnie Russell v. Ryan Comstock

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 24, 2026

On appeal, Rus- sell again contends that the search was unconstitutional and that Powell lacked qualified immunity. We begin with the question of qualified immunity. … Here, for some of the same reasons described in Pearson, we conclude that it would be preferable to proceed directly to the qualified immunity analysis, and we consider only whether it was clearly established law that the

Johnnie Russell v. Ryan Comstock

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 24, 2026

On appeal, Rus- sell again contends that the search was unconstitutional and that Powell lacked qualified immunity. We begin with the question of qualified immunity. … Here, for some of the same reasons described in Pearson, we conclude that it would be preferable to proceed directly to the qualified immunity analysis, and we consider only whether it was clearly established law that the

Doe v. Bobbitt

881 F.2d 510 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 26, 1989

immunity. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, public officials performing discretionary functions are protected against suits for damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of

Raymond J. Hughes, Jr. v. Dale Meyer, John Buss and Robert Combs

880 F.2d 967 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 10, 1990

Police officers are generally protected by qualified immunity if their allegedly unlawful actions meet the test of “ ‘objective legal reasonableness’ ... assessed in the light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established … Meyer’s and Combs’s actions did not obviously violate that standard, and accordingly we find that the district court’s conclusion of qualified immunity is not clearly erroneous.

Alexander v. City Of Milwaukee

474 F.3d 437 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 18, 2007

Clearly Established Law During the Relevant Period 28 Qualified immunity protects officials from suit and from liability for civil damages when, at the time of the challenged action, the contours of the constitutional right … established, we also must conclude that the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Lunini, Joseph A. v. Grayeb, Charles V.

395 F.3d 761 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 18, 2005

on grounds of qualified immunity. … The touchstone of the qualified immunity inquiry is an alleged violation of “clearly established” statutory or con- stitutional rights.

Nicholas Zemlick v. Brad Burkhart

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 22, 2026

Such officials receive qualified immunity unless: “(1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time.” District of Columbia v. … Because Boots’s conduct was not clearly established as unlawful, he is entitled to qualified immunity, and we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Boots. 14

Dwayne Walker v. Dr. Ronald Shansky, Dr. Gandhy, Dr. R. Shroff, and Dr. Mark Carise

28 F.3d 666 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 1, 1994

We consider, as a threshold matter, the issue of qualified immunity. … Because the law here was clearly established, the defendants cannot avail themselves of the qualified immunity defense against alleged violations of the Eighth Amendment.