Case law

Charles R. Jackson v. Tom L. Carey R. Papac, Lt. J. Marshall A. Davis E. Padilla Burton R. Lieberman, Doctor

353 F.3d 750 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 24, 2003

immunity analysis. … Jackson’s Claims Against Prison Officials Individually Individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity unless their alleged conduct violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Alexander ex rel. Estate of Quade v. City & County of San Francisco

29 F.3d 1355 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 8, 1994

The determination of qualified immunity necessitates three inquiries: (1) the identification of the specific right allegedly violated; (2) the determination of whether that right was so “clearly established” as to alert a … Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because Quade had “no clearly established constitutional or statutory right ... not to have police officers accompany health inspectors executing a forcible entry

Hernandez v. City of Salem

332 F. App'x 366 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 11, 2009

Qualified immunity shields law enforcement officers from personal liability unless “the unconstitutionality of the officers’ conduct was clearly established.” Pearson v. … We REVERSE the district court’s order denying Connolly qualified immunity and REMAND for entry of judgment in favor of Connolly.

Alford v. Haner

333 F.3d 972 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 23, 2003

Defendants claimed they were entitled to qualified immunity and had probable cause for the arrest. … The first question under the two-part inquiry for determining whether the officers are entitled to qualified immunity is whether the "law governing the official's conduct [was] clearly established." Act-Up!/Portland v.

Sanders v. Brown

504 F.3d 903 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 26, 2007

Even though the MSA is probably a state act, it does not necessarily qualify for Parker immunity from antitrust liability. … In short, Hoover clearly states that the Midcal test does not apply to sovereign state acts, which are immune from antitrust liability so long as they avoid preemption by authorizing per se illegal activities.

Dunklin v. Mallinger

611 F. App'x 436 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 3, 2015

The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants on grounds of qualified immunity, holding that while a jury could find that the force was excessive, the law was not sufficiently clearly established, given the … The officers were entitled to qualified immunity.

Flores v. Morgan Hill Unified School District

18 F. App'x 646 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 10, 2001

. *648 Defendants contend that they are entitled to immunity from suit because, at the time of the alleged harassment, the law was not clearly established that the students were entitled under the Equal Protection Clause … The defendants further contend that even if the law were clearly established, the administrators’ actions were objectively reasonable.

Swan v. Cochran

56 F.3d 73 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 19, 1995

Sec. 1341 , for failure to state a claim; and (2) in his private capacity on the ground of qualified immunity. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. … Private Capacity Claims 7 "Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages, unless the official's conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional

Erwine v. Westbrook

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 11, 2026

Those who act while clad in its armor cannot be held liable for damages under any circumstances, even if they violate clearly established federal rights, and even if they do so intentionally or maliciously.” Brooks v. … V The last ground urged for affirmance is qualified immunity. The district court did not reach the Tribal Officers’ qualified immunity defenses.

Miller v. Gammie

292 F.3d 982 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 6, 2002

By way of analogy to qualified immunity cases, if the district court had denied the motion to dismiss on absolute immunity grounds and this court affirmed, a motion for summary judgment on immunity grounds could nonetheless … Id. at 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 (recognizing that "[u]nless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement

Tom Hudson & Associates, Inc., and Tom Hudson v. City of Chula Vista, Sca Services Inc., and Chula Vista Sanitary Service, Inc.

746 F.2d 1370 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 5, 1984

Thus, to qualify for Parker v. … The State of California has plainly established a “clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed” policy that supports Chula Vista’s grant of an exclusive trash hauling contract to CVSS.

Grant v. City of Long Beach

315 F.3d 1081 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 16, 2002

Qualified Immunity 27 Officers Watson and Bahash also appeal the district court's denial of their request for qualified immunity as a matter of law. We review this issue de novo. See Janes, 279 F.3d at 886 . … When a police officer asserts qualified immunity, we must apply a two-part analysis under Saucier v.

Mahle v. Municipality of Anchorage

313 F. App'x 18 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 29, 2008

Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001) (holding that second element of qualified immunity test is whether the law violated was clearly established). 3. … Because Crocker was not clearly established law at the time they acted, they too are protected by qualified immunity. 2 The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Mahle v. Municipality of Anchorage

313 F. App'x 18 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 29, 2008

Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001) (holding that second element of qualified immunity test is whether the law violated was clearly established). 3. … Because Crocker was not clearly established law at the time they acted, they too are protected by qualified immunity. 2 The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Agster v. Maricopa County Sheriff's office

144 F. App'x 594 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 20, 2005

To obtain our jurisdiction, all the appellants concede for purposes of the appeal the Agsters’ statement of facts and contend that they are still entitled to qualified immunity. … The law was clearly established that forbade the deputies to deploy such potentially lethal force. See Drummond v. City of Anaheim, 343 F.3d 1052, 1059-1061 (9th Cir.2003).

Joseph Olson, Monica Olson, Javier Vargas v. United States

362 F.3d 1236 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 2, 2004

The government bears the burden of establishing that the test is met and that discretionary immunity applies. Miller, 163 F.3d at 594 . … In sum, the government has failed to establish that discretionary immunity applies with respect to either Kirk’s or Var-land’s actions. See Miller, 163 F.3d at 594 .

SolarCity Corp. v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District

859 F.3d 720 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 12, 2017

But despite this similarity to qualified immunity cases, the Court reasoned that “[qualified immunity is not the law simply to save trouble for the Government and its employees.” Id. … It also held that state-action immunity is not an “ ‘entitlement’ of the same magnitude as qualified immunity or absolute immunity, but rather is more akin to a defense to the original claim.” Id.

Kulas v. Valdez

159 F.3d 453 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 29, 1998

The Court stated that the limits of qualified immunity should be defined in objective terms, with the reasonableness of an official’s conduct measured by reference to clearly established law. … Because the state of the law was clearly established at the time of Dr. Hoffert’s alleged actions, the principal question before this Court for qualified immunity purposes is whether Dr.

Kelly v. City of Oakland

198 F.3d 779 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 23, 1999

The City, however, is not entitled to qualified immunity for these violations. … Whether a particular federal right was clearly established at a particular time presents a pure question of law which must be resolved de novo on appeal. See Elder v.

Washington v. City of North Las Vegas

161 F. App'x 637 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 12, 2005

We therefore do not reach the question of whether the constitutional right was clearly established. See Saucier v. … Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001) (establishing a two-pronged test for determining whether a public official is entitled to qualified immunity). .