Case law

Benjamin K. Orin v. Richard Barclay

272 F.3d 1207 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 9, 2001

Qualified immunity shields them "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." … and McCluskey have qualified immunity.

Bingue v. Prunchak

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 14, 2008

Ct. 1769, 1774 n.2 (2007) (“Qualified immunity is ‘an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability . . . .’ … “On the other hand, if a violation could be made out on a favorable view of the par- ties’ submissions, the next, sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established.” Id.

Watson v. Schwarzenegger

347 F. App'x 282 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 23, 2009

The district court did not err in determining that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on Watson’s fifth and twelfth claims. … Assuming that there was a constitutional violation, the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct was not in violation of clearly established law at the time of Watson’s arrest or his parole revocation

Tuan Van Tran v. Gary Lindsey, Warden Salinas Valley State Prisons State of California

212 F.3d 1143 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 16, 2000

Another possible source of analogous case law might be the law relating to qualified immunity. … Layne, 526 U.S. 603, 609 , 119 S.Ct. 1692 , 143 L.Ed.2d 818 (1999) (holding that, in qualified immunity cases, courts should address whether law was violated prior to determining whether it was clearly established); County

John v. City of El Monte

505 F.3d 907 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 26, 2007

“The first inquiry must be whether a constitutional right would have been violated on the facts alleged; second, assuming the violation is established, the question [is] whether the right was clearly established.... … If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.” Id. at 200-01, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

Gamble v. Moran

15 F.3d 1085 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 8, 1994

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY 9 We review de novo a district court's denial of summary judgment on the issue of qualified immunity. Act Up!/Portland v. Bagley, 988 F.2d 868, 871 (9th Cir.1993). … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4944, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 8074 Lanric Hyland v. Roy L. Wonder, Supervising Judge, Juvenile Court, Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, Individually and in His Official Capacity Daniel M. Hanlon, Presiding Judge, Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, Individually and in His Official Capacity Dennis Sweeney, Chief Probation Officer, San Francisco Juvenile Probation Department, Individually and in His Official Capacity Fred Jordan, Chief Probation Officer, San Francisco Juvenile Probation Department, Individually and in His Official Capacity Stephen La Plante, Director, Juvenile Hall, Individually and in His Official Capacity

117 F.3d 405 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 25, 1997

The defendants asserted qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity 24 We review a determination of qualified immunity de novo. Act Up!/ Portland v.

Preslie Hardwick v. Marcia Vreeken

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 3, 2017

The panel held that defendants’ case for qualified immunity was not supported by the law or the record. … “Clearly Established” An official “cannot be said to have violated a clearly established right unless the right’s contours were sufficiently definite that any reasonable official in [his or her] shoes would have understood

Robert Stock, ph.d. v. Richard Y. Funston John Carpenter Elton Brown Tom Boyer State of California

15 F.3d 1090 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 11, 1994

The defendants moved for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity, and now appeal the denial of that motion. We treat the order denying qualified immunity as a "final" judgment for the purposes of appeal. … It is sufficient to note that unless the defendants can establish a qualified governmental immunity, Stock clearly states claims that must be settled or tried. 4 The motion papers of the defendants asserted facts and opinions

Galen v. County of Los Angeles

468 F.3d 563 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 6, 2006

Standard of Review We review a district court’s decision to grant or deny sum- mary judgment based on qualified immunity de novo. … Because the law regarding excessive bail and peace officers’ liability for recommending bail enhancements was not clearly established, Sergeant Barrier and Deputy Heinrich are entitled to qualified immunity.

Henderson v. County of Los Angeles

293 F. App'x 542 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 19, 2008

If no constitutional right was violated, the inquiry ends and qualified immunity attaches. Id. Second, we consider whether the right was clearly established. Id. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . … ’s second prong: determining whether these constitutional rights were “clearly established.”

Omar Gay v. Amy Parsons

61 F.4th 1088 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 13, 2023

entitled to summary judgment and qualified immunity on the retaliation claim. … We therefore leave the question of qualified immunity to the district court. AFFIRMED.

Leonorilda Ochoa v. City of Mesa

26 F.4th 1050 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 28, 2022

of a clearly established Fourteenth Amendment right. … This is consistent with the suggested approach for qualified-immunity issues. County of Sacramento v.

Grant v. City of Long Beach

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

Qualified Immunity 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 *1089 Janes, 279 F.3d at 886 . … The second question is whether the constitutional right at issue is “clearly established.” Saucier, 533 U.S. at 202, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

Dehne v. Hill

74 F. App'x 794 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 8, 2003

Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity for acts that do not violate “clearly established ... constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Qualified immunity is therefore unavailable to Hill on summary judgment. REVERSED and REMANDED.

Copelan v. Ferry County

326 F. App'x 989 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 8, 2009

Sheriff Warner is entitled to qualified immunity from § 1983 liability because the facts demonstrate that his conduct violated no clearly established constitutional right of Copelan. See Pearson v. … Accordingly, Sheriff Warner is entitled to qualified immunity. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Santos v. Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services

200 F. App'x 681 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 31, 2006

established. … Even if a violation occurred, however, the social workers are entitled to qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established that someone with Santos’s ties to Albert has a liberty interest arising under the Due

Lincoln v. Tuso

16 F. App'x 622 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 18, 2001

MEMORANDUM * Officials are protected from civil damages by qualified immunity if their “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Nothing in this record suggests that the officers’ actions were contrary to clearly established law. Accordingly, the officers were entitled to qualified immunity on the unlawful detention claims.

Johnson v. Rancho Santiago Community College District

623 F.3d 1011 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 8, 2010

Finally, the PSA established a Work Opportunities Pro- gram that required the unions to establish an apprenticeship program for District residents, to encourage the referral and utilization of District residents as workers … Indeed, the plaintiffs clearly could not show that they suffered a depri- vation of their purported right to an education, as they have all graduated. We accordingly reject this claim.

Evans v. Mckay

869 F.2d 1341 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 16, 1989

Qualified or "good faith" immunity is, however, an affirmative defense that must be pleaded by a defendant official. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 815 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2736-37 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1981). … Because answers have not yet been filed in this case, the issue of qualified immunity was not raised or decided below.