Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersca9

10,000+ results

1.35s

  • Meyers v. Redwood City

    400 F.3d 765 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 10, 2005

    Defendants claim that they did not violate the Plaintiffs' constitutional rights and, in the alternative, that those rights were not clearly established and Defendants have qualified immunity from suit. … B 29 Even if we thought that the officers crossed a line established by Harris , the officers are surely entitled to qualified immunity because they could not have known that they were violating the Plaintiffs'"clearly established

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • Eichler v. Sherbin

    283 F. App'x 528 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 23, 2008

    We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , 1 and we affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand for further consideration of whether the constitutional right at issue was clearly established for qualified immunity purposes … “If the law did not put the officer on notice that his conduct would be clearly unlawful, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is appropriate.” Id.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Ewing v. City of Stockton

    588 F.3d 1218 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 9, 2009

    The Ewings do not establish that the unlawfulness of charging Heather with murder on the facts in question was clearly established. See Hope v. … The Supreme Court has clearly stated that with respect to advising police, prosecutors are entitled to qualified not absolute immunity. Burns, 500 U.S. at 492-95 , 111 S.Ct. 1934 .

    Cited 476 timesPublished
  • Steven Hyer v. City and County of Honolulu

    118 F.4th 1044 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 23, 2024

    The panel affirmed the district court’s grant of qualified immunity with respect to the use of a police dog because the law was not clearly established. HYER V. … Indeed, “[e]ven if a government official violates a constitutional right, the official is entitled to qualified immunity unless the violated right was clearly established at the time of the incident.” Andrews v.

    Cited 33 timesPublished
  • Armendariz v. Penman

    31 F.3d 860 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 1, 1994

    Defendants are entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity if plaintiffs’ complaint fails to state a federal claim, Siegert, 500 U.S. at 233 , 111 S.Ct. at 1793-94 ; or if in light of clearly established principles … Clearly Established The plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the constitutional right allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct. Baker v.

    Vacated in part, on other grounds by Armendariz v. Penman, 75 F.3d 1311 (1996)Cited 28 timesPublished
  • Ramon Cortesluna v. Manuel Leon

    979 F.3d 645 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 27, 2020

    Principles of Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects individual officers “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Officers are entitled to qualified immunity in § 1983 actions unless they violate “clearly established” rights. Reichle v. Howards, 566 U.S. 658, 664 (2012).

    Reversed on other grounds by Rivas-Villegas v. Cortesluna, 595 U.S. 1 (2021)Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Rettele v. Los Angeles County

    186 F. App'x 765 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 21, 2006

    Having determined that Plaintiffs’ factual allegations, if true, may establish a constitutional violation, we turn our attention to whether the law was clearly established, such that a reasonable officer would have known … to qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Richard Ceballos v. Gil Garcetti Frank Sundstedt Carol Najera County of Los Angeles

    361 F.3d 1168 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 22, 2004

    The Constitutional Right Was Clearly Established Even if Ceballos’s speech is constitutionally protected, the defendants are nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity if the constitutional right was not clearly established … law is clearly established, and qualified immunity is therefore unavailable.

    Reversed on other grounds by Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006)Cited 61 timesPublished
  • Ramirez v. City of Buena Park

    560 F.3d 1012 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 25, 2009

    “If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.” Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . … Under Saucier’s second prong, we ask “whether the right was clearly established.” Id.

    Cited 185 timesPublished
  • Marquez v. Gutierrez

    322 F.3d 689 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 6, 2003

    The qualified immunity inquiry has two parts: "(1) Was the law governing the state official's conduct clearly established? (2) Under that law could a reasonable state official have believed his conduct was lawful?" … Further, Marquez argues that a prison official cannot act maliciously and sadistically while, at the same time, reasonably believing that his actions conform to clearly established law.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Broam v. Bogan

    320 F.3d 1023 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 25, 2003

    a criminal investigation either does not violate a federal constitutional right, or the constitutional right was not clearly established on the date of the alleged violation. … not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.'"

    Cited 250 timesPublished
  • Torres v. Runyon

    80 F. App'x 594 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 6, 2003

    If the official violated a constitutional right, he or she nonetheless may be entitled to qualified immunity if the right was not clearly established such that a reasonable official “would understand that what he is doing … The next prong of the qualified immunity analysis is “ ‘a two-part inquiry: (1) Was the law governing the state official’s conduct clearly established?

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Hyland v. Wonder

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

    The defendants asserted qualified immunity. … The district court granted the individual defendants summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity, finding that it was not “clearly established” in 1989 that a government volunteer possessed the same First Amendment

    Cited 73 timesPublished
  • Angel Mendez v. County of Los Angeles

    897 F.3d 1067 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 27, 2018

    The officers could not benefit from qualified immunity, because at the time of the incident, case law had clearly established that the officers’ entry was unlawful. Mendez v. … The law on all these points was clearly established at the time, so the officers could not obtain qualified immunity for their unlawful search. Id. at 1191.

    Cited 69 timesPublished
  • Michael Seals-Brown v. Jeffrey Llopis

    678 F. App'x 533 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 23, 2017

    qualified immunity related to their enforcement of those conditions. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Samantha Vazquez v. County of Kern

    949 F.3d 1153 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 31, 2020

    The panel held that the Officer was not entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Kisela v.

    Cited 155 timesPublished
  • Flores v. Morgan Hill Unified School District

    324 F.3d 1130 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 8, 2003

    The district court also held that the right to be free from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation was clearly established. Defendants filed this interlocutory appeal of the denial of qualified immunity. … Clearly Established Law Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity only if the law at the time of the alleged constitutional violation was not clearly established. See Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201-02, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Jim Maxwell v. County of San Diego

    708 F.3d 1075 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 14, 2013

    Qualified immunity protects government officers “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 … To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, we ask, in the order we choose, (1) whether the alleged misconduct violated a right and (2) whether the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged

    Cited 128 timesPublished
  • Robinson v. York

    566 F.3d 817 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 27, 2009

    Defendants appeal from the denial of qualified immunity. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. I. … not affect whether Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity at this stage of the proceedings.

    Cited 148 timesPublished
  • Daniel Tanner v. Anita Phillips

    669 F. App'x 444 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 4, 2016

    established right. 2 14-35983 See Pearson v. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009) (defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless the conduct at issue violated a clearly established constitutional right).

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.