Case law

Bias v. Moynihan

508 F.3d 1212 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 29, 2007

“In deciding whether Defendants are entitled as a matter of law to qualified immunity, we must accept the facts in the light most favorable to the Plaintiffs and then determine whether, in light of clearly established principles … In determining whether Officer Moynihan is entitled to qualified immunity, we must ask two questions: “ ‘(1) Was the law governing the officer’s conduct clearly established?

Bryan v. McPherson

590 F.3d 767 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 28, 2009

Officer McPherson appeals the denial of his motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … Did Officer McPherson Violate Bryan’s Clearly Established Rights?

Neil O'Brien v. John Welty

818 F.3d 920 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 7, 2016

Qualified Immunity The district court held that because defendants had not violated any of O’Brien’s constitutional rights, they were necessarily entitled to qualified immunity. … constitutional right; and (2) if so, whether the right was clearly established in light of the specific context of the case.”

Goldstein v. City of Long Beach

481 F.3d 1170 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 27, 2007

Qualified immunity, on the other hand, shields officials from suits for damages only when their alleged con- duct either does not violate a constitutional right or violates a constitutional right that was not “clearly established … [with] the judicial phase of [Goldstein’s] criminal trial,” Genzler, 410 F.3d at 643, or to clearly established prosecutorial functions such as deciding whether to prosecute a particular case.

Navarro v. City of South Gate

81 F. App'x 192 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 14, 2003

. 1 A finding of qualified immunity depends on a two-part analysis. … If we conclude such a violation could be made out, we must ask whether the right was clearly established. Id.

Sarah Patterson v. James Van Arsdel

883 F.3d 826 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 23, 2018

The general presumption is that qualified immunity provides sufficient protection to officials. Burns v. Reed, 500 U.S. 478, 486–87 (1991). … See, e.g., Burns, 500 U.S. at 493 (qualified immunity for giving legal advice to police officers); Kalina, 522 U.S. at 130–31 (qualified immunity for attesting to facts in support of a search warrant).

Gallagher v. City of Winlock Washington

287 F. App'x 568 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 16, 2008

Qualified immunity Under Saucier v. … However, this step does not provide a basis to affirm the grant of qualified immunity. At the time of the events in question here, the relevant Fourth Amendment law, as discussed above, was clearly established.

Garth Maag v. Richard Wessler Valley County, Montana

993 F.2d 718 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 24, 1993

The doctrine of qualified immunity does not require that probable cause to detain exist: "[e]ven absent probable cause, qualified immunity is available if a reasonable police officer could have believed that his or her conduct … was lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the searching officers possessed.”

Price v. State of Hawaii

5 F.3d 539 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 23, 1993

Id. at 706-07 . 8 Price next attempts to overcome the difficult task of showing that the state officials violated clearly established law and therefore were not entitled to qualified immunity. 3 We previously stated: 9 [I … It therefore follows that the state officials did not violate clearly established law and are entitled to qualified immunity.

Shelly Lal v. State of California

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 31, 2014

does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” … In determining whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, we consider (1) whether there has been a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the officer

Butler v. Elle

281 F.3d 1014 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 26, 2002

In contrast to qualified immunity, absolute immunity does not require the official to have acted reasonably or in accordance with clearly established law. … immunity question whether the official's alleged conduct violated clearly established law, which is an "essentially legal question."

Nickel v. Woods

229 F. App'x 432 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 28, 2007

Qualified immunity precludes liability, however, unless “a reasonably well-trained officer in [the defendant’s] position would have known that his [application] failed to establish probable cause and that he should not have … Nickel’s claim fails because Woods is entitled to qualified immunity.

Cloninger v. Porter

52 F. App'x 333 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 22, 2002

(“Porter”), William Mike Patterson (“Patterson”), and Clark County, Nevada, and the court’s grant of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds in favor of Porter and Patterson on the § 1983 claims for which they are … We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment and decision regarding qualified immunity de novo. See Sorrels v. McKee, 290 F.3d 965, 969 (9th Cir.2002).

Drendolyn Sims v. Mike Stanton

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 16, 2013

Qualified Immunity In a claim for civil damages under § 1983, to avoid the bar of qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show that the officer violated a constitutional right and that the right was “clearly established … That Welsh leaves open the possibility for a “rare” exception to this rule does not mean that the rule was not clearly established at the time and does not change our qualified immunity analysis.

Kirstin Johnson v. Kierstie Barr

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 18, 2023

the law did not clearly establish that probable cause was lacking. … BARR clearly establish that probable cause was lacking. This reasonable officer standard for qualified immunity differs from the prudent person standard guiding our probable cause for arrest analysis.

Squaw Valley Development Company Squaw Valley Ski Corporation Squaw Valley Preserve v. Martin Goldberg Harold Singer

375 F.3d 936 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 20, 2004

“Qualified immunity, however, shields § 1983 defendants ‘[fjrom liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … claim is still viable in this circuit — remain imprecise, i.e., not clearly established.

Merrick v. Sattle Police Department

14 F. App'x 957 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 30, 2001

The first question asks whether the right at issue is clearly established. The second question asks whether the officer could have reasonably believed his conduct was lawful. Id. … It is beyond dispute that there is a clearly established right to be free from warrantless arrest where a police officer does not have probable cause to believe a crime has been committed. Floyd v.

96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 839, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 1369 Tomas Armendariz Rosa C. Armendariz Harry Julian Brown, Jr. Lance A. Bukouskis v. James F. Penman W.R. Holcomb David M. Stachowski Cecil Dillard Kenneth J. Henderson, Tomas Armendariz Rosa C. Armendariz Harry Julian Brown, Jr. Lance A. Bukouskis v. James F. Penman W.R. Holcomb David M. Stachowski Cecil Dillard Kenneth J. Henderson, and Al Boughey Larry Reed, Tomas Armendariz Rosa C. Armendariz v. James F. Penman

75 F.3d 1311 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 7, 1996

immunity because their actions did not violate any clearly established federal constitutional or statutory rights. … The defendants are entitled to qualified immunity only "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v.

George H. Robinson v. Kingston W. Prunty

249 F.3d 862 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 7, 2001

established' law." … "In order to determine whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, a court must (1) identify the right allegedly violated, (2) determine whether the right was`clearly established,' and (3) determine whether a reasonable

Josiah L. Hoohuli v. George Ariyoshi

741 F.2d 1169 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 30, 1984

Qualified Immunity The district court relied on principles of qualified immunity as set forth in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) as an alternative basis for its dismissal. … In Harlow , the Court held 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