Case law

Meyer v. Fidelity Savings

944 F.2d 562 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 13, 1991

The issue of qualified immunity should not have been submitted to the jury because Pattullo violated no clearly established law. See Schwartzman v. … Valenzuela, 846 F.2d 1209, 1211 (9th Cir.1988) (question of clearly established right is question of law). Thus, any error in the qualified immunity instruction was harmless. V.

Mendocino Environmental Center v. Mendocino County

192 F.3d 1283 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 24, 1999

We affirm the district court’s denial of appellant’s motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity. … the resolution of the qualified immunity issue.

United States v. Willy Elmer Sweeten

933 F.2d 765 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 30, 1991

establish that the conviction is a predicate conviction for *770 enhancement purposes. … To rule that a court can only consider the judgment of conviction when some other document, like the indictment or a signed guilty plea, might establish that the conviction in question clearly qualifies as a predicate conviction

Jones v. Cunningham

94 F. App'x 447 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 12, 2004

Granting summary judgment to the guards on the ground of qualified immunity is “improper if, under the plaintiffs version of the facts, and in light of the clearly established law, a reasonable officer could not have believed … Accordingly, the district court’s denial of qualified immunity is AFFIRMED.

Goldstein v. City of Long Beach

481 F.3d 1170 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 28, 2007

Qualified immunity, on the other hand, shields officials from suits for damages only when their alleged conduct 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.

Burke v. County of Alameda

586 F.3d 725 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 10, 2009

“To be clearly established, the law must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.” Trevino v. … We affirm the grant of summary judgment as to Foster only because he is entitled to immunity. Because local government units are not entitled to the qualified-immunity defense, Hervey v.

Alexander v. Perez

124 F. App'x 525 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 23, 2005

The district court denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the issue of qualified immunity, and they appealed. … The allegations also would establish that Bruce and Perez violated clearly established law.

Jimenez v. City of Costa Mesa

174 F. App'x 399 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 5, 2006

Officer Le is not entitled to qualified immunity on Carmen Jimenez’s claim. … We conclude, however, that Officer Chamberlin is entitled to qualified immunity because in 2001, the contours of the right against excessive force in the pepper-spray context were not so clearly established that a reasonable

Headwaters Forest Defense v. County of Humboldt

240 F.3d 1185 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 31, 2001

Qualified Immunity “ ‘The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … The determination whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity involves a two-step analysis: “1) Was the law governing the official’s conduct clearly established?

Rhodes v. Robinson

380 F.3d 1123 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 19, 2004

Rowland, 65 F.3d 802 , 806 & n. 4 (9th Cir.1995) ("[T]he prohibition against retaliatory punishment is `clearly established law' in the Ninth Circuit, for qualified immunity purposes. … must first reiterate our firm recognition that "the prohibition against retaliatory punishment is `clearly established law' in the Ninth Circuit, for qualified immunity purposes."

Greater Los Angeles Council on Deafness, Inc. v. Zolin

812 F.2d 1103 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 11, 1987

in his official capacity, qualified immunity is the general rule and absolute immunity *1108 the exceptional case. … Accordingly, we conclude that the individual defendants here are entitled only to a qualified immunity, which protects them fully “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Norse v. City of Santa Cruz

629 F.3d 966 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 15, 2010

On the eve of trial, the district court sua sponte granted judgment against him, holding that the city officials were entitled to qualified immunity. … his clearly established rights.”

97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4031, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 6857 V-1 Oil Company, an Idaho Corporation v. Steven A. Smith, a Federal Railroad Administration Inspector, in His Individual Capacity

114 F.3d 854 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 29, 1997

Further, our circuit precedent does not clearly establish that warrantless seizures in the closely regulated industry context violate the Fourth Amendment. 20 V-1 argues that Smith violated clearly established law because … The law was not clearly established when Smith acted. Qualified immunity insulates Smith from civil liability for his actions.IV 23 We reverse the district court's denial of summary judgment.

Norse v. City of Santa Cruz

586 F.3d 697 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 3, 2009

error to grant qualified immunity to defendants as a matter of law. … I would reverse the grant of qualified immunity as to the 2002 meeting and remand this claim for trial.

Ellis v. City of San Diego

176 F.3d 1183 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 14, 1999

Qualified Immunity Both Hartson and Van Hoesen asserted below and on appeal that they are entitled to qualified immunity, and argue that this provides an alternative basis for affirming the district court’s order. … Cole, 504 U.S. 158 , 112 S.Ct. 1827 , 118 L.Ed.2d 504 (1992). 7 In determining Van Hoesen’s claim of qualified immunity, we consider whether Ellis has alleged that Van Hoesen acted unreasonably to deprive him of a clearly-established

State of Idaho v. Coeur D'Alene Tribe

794 F.3d 1039 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 22, 2015

Thus, the immunity inquiry necessarily requires the determination of whether Hold’em qualifies as Class III gaming.  STATE OF IDAHO V. COEUR D’ALENE TRIBE 9 A. … In a handful of clearly distinguishable cases, courts have determined that gaming statutes permitting casino nights for charitable purposes establish that gaming is “explicitly authorized by the laws of the State” and that

Charles M. Grossman, M.D. v. City of Portland, a Public Body, and Todd Davis

33 F.3d 1200 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 6, 1994

legal reasonableness’ of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.” … immunity from personal liability, provided they can establish objective good faith in relying on the town’s policy.”).

Rogers v. Clark County School District

52 F. App'x 911 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 9, 2002

Goldman argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate Rogers’ clearly established constitutional rights. … If we find a violation of a constitutional right, we consider whether the right was clearly established. Id.

Norwood v. Vance

572 F.3d 626 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 9, 2009

Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity so long as a right to outdoor exercise in the midst of severe ongoing prison violence was not clearly established at the time defendants acted. See Saucier v. … Certainly, no authority clearly established the contrary. Allen didn’t. See p. 631-32 supra. And Spain v.

Alana 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 25 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 .