Case law

Kenneth George Morris and Judy Irving Morris v. County of Tehama

795 F.2d 791 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 28, 1986

Carlton argues that Cashdollar’s immunity nevertheless must have been predicated upon a finding that the pre-warrant search did not “violate[ ] a clearly established ... right[ ] of which a reasonable person would have known … Thus, the question we must address is whether Cashdollar might have been entitled to immunity even if the prewarrant search did “violate[ ] a clearly established ... right[ ] of which a reasonable person would have known.

Rene Samaniego Morales v. Robert M. Mayer

57 F.3d 1077 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 25, 1995

Bagley, we adopted a two-tiered analysis for determining whether a public official is entitled to qualified immunity: (1) Was the law governing the official's conduct clearly established? … Thus, the officers were reasonable in concluding that searching the car would not violate any clearly established law. Defendants therefore are entitled to qualified immunity. 18 B.

Brown v. Li

308 F.3d 939 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 24, 2002

Qualified Immunity on the First Amendment Claim We apply a three-step test to determine whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity on a federal constitutional claim. … Qualified Immunity on the Procedural Due Process Claim Plaintiff also argues that Defendants violated his clearly established right to due process when they “withheld [Plaintiffs] degree and otherwise harmed [him] without

Stacy Butler Darryl Bradshaw, an Individual Clifton Cunningham, an Individual Edric Jordan, an Individual Kevin Tandard, an Individual Kyle Winters, an Individual v. San Diego District Attorney's Office, a Municipal Sub-Agency of the County of San Diego, and Edward Cervantes, an Individual, Stacy Butler Darryl Bradshaw, an Individual Clifton Cunningham, an Individual Edric Jordan, an Individual Kevin Standard, an Individual Kyle Winters, an Individual v. San Diego District Attorney's Office, a Municipal Sub-Agency of the County of San Diego Edward Cervantes, an Individual City of San Diego San Diego Police Department Jim Kelly, an Individual, and Keith Burt, an Individual

370 F.3d 956 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 4, 2004

The Supreme Court has held that official immunity, whether qualified or absolute, is "an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability." Mitchell v. … See Mitchell, 472 U.S. at 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 ("Unless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal [pursuant to Rule

Walnut Properties, Inc., a California Corporation and Vincent Miranda v. City of Whittier M.D. Klaxton R.L. Henderson L.A. Strong James Bale, as Chief of Police, City of Whittier J. Robert Flandrick, as City Attorney, City of Whittier and Whittier City Council, Walnut Properties, Inc., a California Corporation v. J. Robert Flandrick James Bale City of Whittier Whittier City Council and Elvin Porter, Walnut Properties, Inc., a California Corporation and Vincent Miranda v. City of Whittier M.D. Klaxton, R.L. Henderson, L.A. Strong, Gene Chandler, and V.A. Lopez, as Members of the Whittier City Council James Bale, as Chief of Police of the City of Whittier and J. Robert Flandrick, as City Attorney of the City of Whittier

861 F.2d 1102 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 9, 1988

or, alternatively, qualified immunity. … We hold that Walnut's rights were not so clearly established. 35 In rejecting Porter's and Flandrick's claim of qualified immunity, the district court found that Walnut's rights were "clearly established" by the district

Jonathon Castro v. County of Los Angeles

833 F.3d 1060 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 15, 2016

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Therefore, qualified immunity does not bar the claim against them.

Cox v. Boxer

44 F. App'x 184 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 8, 2002

Appellants Boxer and Farnell timely appeal the district court’s order denying their Second Motion for Summary Judgment asserting qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity generally shields government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Michael Grabowski v. Arizona Board of Regents

69 F.4th 1110 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 13, 2023

immunity. … We begin our qualified immunity analysis, as we may, “by considering whether there is a violation of clearly established law without determining whether a constitutional violation occurred.” Krainski v. Nevada ex rel.

Stoot v. City of Everett

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 18, 2009

We nonetheless affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to defendants on the Fourth Amendment claim on the basis of qualified immunity, as the pertinent law was not clearly established at the time of the violations … QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Even if Jensen did violate Paul’s Fourth Amendment rights by seizing him without probable cause, Jensen may still be entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct “ ‘[did] not vio- late clearly established

Benjamin Kohn v. State Bar of California

119 F.4th 693 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 21, 2024

Title II provides that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such 6 KOHN V. … In Phiffer, we considered Title II as a whole and held that our precedent “clearly commands the conclusion that the State is not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity under Title II of the ADA.” 384 F.3d at 792.

Sherol Diruzza v. County Of Tehama

206 F.3d 1304 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 21, 2000

The district court further held, in the alternative, that individual defendants Heard and Floyd were entitled to qualified immunity because they had not violated a clearly established right. … Id. 37 For purposes of determining qualified immunity, the law must be clearly established at the time of the defendant's acts. In this case, the alleged retaliation occurred in 1995.

Delores D. Dixon v. Wallowa County, a Body Politic & Corporate of the State of Oregon Ron Jett, Wallowa County Sheriff Richard Stein, Wallowa County Undersheriff Matt Marmor, Wallowa County Sheriff's Deputy Roger Jensen Norma Jean McNall Delores D. Dixon v. Wallowa County, a Body Politic & Corporate of the State of Oregon Ron Jett, Wallowa County Sheriff Richard Stein, Wallowa County Under-Sheriff, and Matt Marmor, Wallowa County Sheriff's Deputy Roger Jensen Norma Jean McNall

336 F.3d 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 21, 2003

If so, "the next, sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established." Id. … claim, arguing that the law was not clearly established.

96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3752, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 6115 Jeanette Reynolds, as Administrator of the Estate of Paul Reynolds, Deceased, and Individually v. County of San Diego Jeffrey Jackson, Jim Roache, Sheriff, Denise Reynolds v. County of San Diego Jeffrey Jackson, Jim Roache, Sheriff

84 F.3d 1162 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 28, 1996

Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 226 , 112 S.Ct. 534, 536 , 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991) (qualified immunity protects officials from liability if a reasonable officer could have believed his actions were lawful in light of clearly established … Second, we determine whether the law governing the official's conduct is clearly enough established to alert a reasonable officer to its constitutional parameters.

Duncan v. Weatherford

22 F. App'x 905 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 28, 2001

The school district officials are entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct toward Duncan was reasonable under the circumstances known to officials at the time, and in light of clearly established law. … Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment based on qualified immunity. AFFIRMED.

Krieg v. Mills

8 F. App'x 663 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 18, 2001

Because the government did not waive sovereign immunity, the district court properly dismissed the Kriegs’ claims against defendants in them official capacities. See id. … Because the collection of taxes does not violate any clearly established right, the district court properly concluded that the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. See Wages v.

Campbell v. STATE OF WASHINGTON DSHS

671 F.3d 837 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 7, 2011

STATE OF WASHINGTON 20033 Defendants violated Justine’s due process right, then we pro- ceed to our qualified immunity analysis to determine if the constitutional right in question “was clearly established” at … the time of the alleged violation, finding qualified immunity if the right was not clearly established.

Aholelei v. Hawaii

220 F. App'x 670 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 14, 2007

Aholelei contends that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on sovereign immunity, mootness, and qualified immunity grounds. 1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm in part, vacate … Because we are remanding the qualified immunity question, Aholelei’s motion to take judicial notice is denied.

Himes v. Stephens

270 F. App'x 575 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 17, 2008

Because it was clearly established at the time Defendants acted that the First Amendment prohibits intentional actions that deter or chill protected speech, we conclude that the Defendants have not demonstrated that they … are entitled to qualified immunity.

Hale v. Norton

476 F.3d 694 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 5, 2007

complains violated clearly estab- lished law. … Like qualified immunity, the Hales’ claim turns on an “essentially legal question,” and that claim is “effectively lost” if the NPS conducts the NEPA analysis. If the Hales  HALE v.

39 Fair empl.prac.cas. 350, 41 Fair empl.prac.cas. 931, 38 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 35,647 Kathryn Lowe v. City of Monrovia, Paul Stuart, Robert Bartlett, Monrovia City Council, John Nobrega, Mary Wilcox, Ed Zoolalian, Robert Ovrom and Betty Logans, Defendants

775 F.2d 998 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 21, 1986

Whether the City employees are immune turns on the objective reasonableness of their conduct in light of clearly established law, not on their subjective good faith. Tubbesing v. … immunity.