Case law

Jewett v. Anders

521 F.3d 818 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 11, 2008

a given set of facts demonstrates a violation of clearly established constitutional law. … right; (2) whether that constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Green v. Newport

868 F.3d 629 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 22, 2017

Qualified Immunity Framework “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Green has failed to meet the burden of establishing that the frisk violated clearly established law, and we find that Officer Newport is entitled to qualified immunity regarding the frisk. II.

Blake Stewardson v. Cameron Biggs

43 F.4th 732 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 5, 2022

The court explained that “it is clearly established that officers have a duty to intervene when a realistic opportunity would prevent use of excessive force on handcuffed individuals, individuals who are not or have stopped … It is clearly established that “[a]n officer who is present and fails to intervene to prevent other law enforce- ment officers from infringing the constitutional rights of citi- zens is liable under § 1983 if that officer

Billie Thompson v. Lance Cope

900 F.3d 414 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 14, 2018

Step 2: Clearly Established Law We have appellate jurisdiction to review the legal issue at the second step of qualified immunity analysis: whether the constitutional right that Heishman’s estate asserts was clearly established … In Hope, the Court denied qualified immunity and held that handcuffing a prisoner to a hitching post violated clearly established law. Hope teaches that a case directly on point is not required.

Elizabeth Sebesta v. Andrea Davis

878 F.3d 226 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 21, 2017

The district court, recall, held that Childs and Bean were entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutional in- jury was not clearly established. … Our focus is on the second part of the immunity test—whether the right on which Sebesta relies was clearly established.

Mondrea Vinning-El v. Scott Long, Correctional Officer, David Reid, Correctional Officer, and John Doe, Sergeant and Lieutenant

482 F.3d 923 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 27, 2007

immunity, and Vinning-El appeals. … We agree with their concession since it was clearly established well before 2001 that the conditions Vinning-El describes, if true, deprived him of the “minimal civilized measure of life’s necessities.” See Rhodes v.

Robert Jackson v. Richard J. Elrod

881 F.2d 441 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 7, 1989

Their conduct clearly violated the law established in Bell , therefore the doctrine of qualified immunity does not protect them from liability for damages for the book rejections.” Jackson v. … The defendants here claim qualified immunity because the case law did not clearly establish that it was a denial of a pretrial detainee’s First Amendment rights to ban his receipt of all hard-back books, regardless of the

George Owens v. Matthew J. Frank

394 F.3d 490 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 6, 2005

, but ‘an unreasonable application’ of clearly established federal law, or based on ‘an unreasonable determination of the facts’ (emphasis added).”); Dixon v. … Section 2254(d)(1) provides that habeas relief shall not be afforded unless a state court reached a result "that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined

Jeremy Meyers v. Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wi

836 F.3d 818 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2016

In  addition  to  being  a  defense,  however,  sovereign  immunity, like qualified immunity, also bears the character‐ istics  of  “immunity  from  trial  and  the  attendant  burdens  of  litigation.” Abelesz v.  … Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 672 (2009)  (qualified immunity “is both a defense to liability and a lim‐ ited  entitlement  not  to  stand  trial  or  face  the  other  burdens  of litigation.”). 

Ronald S. Biddle v. Amy J. Martin and Paul Lehmann

992 F.2d 673 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 22, 1993

The court also found that because the arrest was reasonable, the officers violated no clearly established constitutional rights, and consequently were entitled to qualified immunity for their actions. … In this case, then, qualified immunity shields the defendant police officers from Biddle’s damage action if “a reasonable officer could have believed [Biddle’s arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and

George Rakovich v. Gregory Wade and Darryl Drake, George Rakovich v. Chester Kass

850 F.2d 1180 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 14, 1988

The parameters of the argument were clearly set: does a police officer in this situation enjoy a qualified immunity? … Nuclear Regulatory Commissioners, 747 F.2d 139, 148 (3d Cir.1984) (no qualified immunity if the defendant violated “a clearly established and well litigated general proposition in which the case at hand merely presents a

Hammond v. Kunard

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

Qualified Immunity The appellants next argue that them actions are protected by qualified immunity. … 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

Qaid Rafeeq Azeez and Abdullah Muhammad v. James W. Fairman, Warden, John E. Wright, Asst. Warden, and A. Dodge, 120 (c.o.)

795 F.2d 1296 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 30, 1986

The only question is whether they violated any clearly established federal constitutional right. … The words “clearly established ... constitutional rights” may not be used to read the defense of immunity out of federal tort law by the facile expedient of stating constitutional rights in the most general possible terms

Joseph Ruffino, Randall A. Noble, and Emmett Doherty v. Michael Sheahan, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Cook County, Illinois

218 F.3d 697 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 27, 2000

Because the rationale that supports qualified immunity from suit in individual capacity cases is absent in official capacity cases, it is well established that the qualified immunity doctrine does not apply to official capacity … The law of qualified immunity requires a plaintiff to show (1) that she has asserted a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) that the right in question was clearly established at the time of the challenged action.

Erika Mabes v. Shannon Thompson

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 28, 2025

Both sets of defendants invoked qual- ified immunity, contending that their actions did not violate the Mabeses’ clearly established rights. … Thompson’s en- titlement to qualified immunity naturally follows from the Mabeses’ failure to carry their “burden of demonstrating the violation of a clearly established right.” Forman v.

Henry S. Kijonka v. Michael Seitzinger

363 F.3d 645 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 14, 2004

We cannot find a reported Illinois case that found the elements of assault satisfied in any case remotely like this one, and this dooms Rietz’s defense of qualified immunity. … Kirksey, 885 F.2d 476, 478 (8th Cir.1989), but it goes far to establish qualified immunity.

Michael L. Davis v. John Zirkelbach

149 F.3d 614 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 9, 1998

Ordinarily, because Lenn is entitled to qualified immunity from a suit based on the legal advice he gave to the police officers, we would ask whether his actions violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional … In Harlow , the Supreme Court explained its scope as follows: *620 If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing

Viilo v. Eyre

547 F.3d 707 · 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.

Lana Canen v. Dennis Chapman

847 F.3d 407 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 27, 2017

Detective Chapman’s failure to disclose that he was not trained as a latent print examiner cannot be characterized as a violation of any clearly established right, and, accordingly, the doctrine of qualified immunity protects … provide the defense with clearly exculpatory information, the officer could not claim qualified immunity.

Roric Gibbs v. Brooke Lomas

755 F.3d 529 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 17, 2014

Gibbs’s constitutional rights and, even if she did, those rights were not clearly established when she acted. Accordingly, she urges, she is entitled to qualified immunity. … 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 would have known