Case law

Hydrick v. Hunter

466 F.3d 676 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 1, 2006

To defeat qualified immunity, “the right allegedly violated must be defined at the appropriate level of specificity before a court can determine if it was clearly established.” Wilson v. … Thus, there are two bodies of law from which we might draw “clearly established” law for qualified immunity purposes: first, where the SVPs claim a violation of a right that is clearly established even in the prison context

Puller v. Baca

781 F.3d 1190 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 20, 2015

When a defendant asserts qualified immunity, as Detective Baca does here, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish (1) a violation of a constitutional right (2) that was clearly established. Id. … Ultimately, “the record must clearly demonstrate the plaintiff has satisfied his heavy two-part burden; otherwise, the defendant[] is entitled to qualified immunity.” Id.

Jerry Lawler v. Hardeman Cnty., Tenn.

93 F.4th 919 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 16, 2024

Qualified immunity shields public officials from the time and expense of a trial unless their actions infringed “clearly established” rules that a “reasonable person” would have understood. … The changes do not affect our resolution because Lawler’s father must overcome qualified immunity’s “clearly established” prong.

Jafet Castro-Reyes v. German Bosque

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 6, 2026

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory … immunity under the clearly established law of this Circuit.

White v. Pauly

26 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 409 · Supreme Court of the United States · Jan 9, 2017

All three officers moved for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. … 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.' " Mullenix v.

Ashker v. Schwarzenegger

339 F. App'x 751 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 30, 2009

McGrath is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. See Brosseau v. … Haugen, 543 U.S. 194, 198 , 125 S.Ct. 596 , 160 L.Ed.2d 583 (2004) (holding officer entitled to immunity “[i]f the law at the time did not clearly establish that the officer’s conduct would violate the Constitution”).

Livant v. Clifton

272 F. App'x 113 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 7, 2008

Government officials performing discretionary functions are generally granted qualified immunity and are “shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … They are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their conduct does not violate “clearly established” rights of which a reasonable person would have known, id.

Craig Singletary v. MO Dept. of Correct

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 14, 2005

Texas Tech Univ., 80 F.3d 1042, 1046 (5th Cir. 1996) (holding that Texas Tech and Texas Tech employees enjoy Eleventh Amendment immunity and qualified immunity respectively against § 1981 claims); Mitchell v. … Dept., 297 F.3d 751, 759 (8th Cir. 2002) (surveying the law and concluding that it was "clearly established" that at-will employees could sue for employment discrimination under § 1981).

Shreve v. Jessamine County Fiscal Court

453 F.3d 681 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 7, 2006

Shreve has provided sufficient evidence of a violation of her clearly established constitutional right against the use of excessive police force in the course of arrest, and qualified immunity is not warranted under Saucier … immunity is not available for lack of a "clearly established" right.

McRaven v. Sanders

577 F.3d 974 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 20, 2009

was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.” … The district court denied defendant-appellants qualified immunity. A detainee’s right to medical treatment is clearly established. Estelle, 429 U.S. at 104 , 97 S.Ct. 285 .

McKenna v. Edgell

617 F.3d 432 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 17, 2010

The court applied the doctrine of qualified immunity because “there is no ‘clearly established law 1 creating federal liability for a constitutional tort” that occurs when paramedics responding to an emergency restrain a … As described above, both actions violated clearly established constitutional rights, and the denial of qualified immunity was appropriate. C.

Brian Davis v. George Wigen

76 F.4th 246 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 4, 2023

Qualified Immunity The Federal Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity as to Plaintiffs’ RFRA claim because the law was not clearly established when Moshannon Valley denied Davis’s marriage request … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982) (holding that qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

C. B. v. City of Sonora

769 F.3d 1005 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 15, 2014

Next we turn to Chief McIntosh’s and Officer Prock’s qualified immunity arguments. We review de novo a district court’s qualified immunity order denying judgment as a matter of law. La-Londe v. … To determine whether an individual officer is entitled to qualified immunity, we ask (1) whether the official violated a constitutional right and (2) whether the constitutional right was clearly established. Pearson v.

Kendrick Story v. Maxcie Foote

782 F.3d 968 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 9, 2015

Correctional officers are entitled to qualified immunity unless they violated clearly established rights of the inmate of which a reasonable person would have known, see Pearson v. … The *971 Supreme Court recently has reserved judgment twice on the question whether decisions of a federal court of appeals are a source of clearly established law for purposes of qualified immunity analysis.

Hattie Tanner v. David Walters

98 F.4th 726 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 15, 2024

Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from civil liability “when their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a  No. … “When a defendant invokes qualified immunity in a motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must offer sufficient evidence to create a genuine dispute of fact that the defendant violated a clearly established right.”

Barber v. Miller

809 F.3d 840 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 2, 2015

We therefore confine our inquiry to the clearly established prong of the qualified-immunity analysis. … Because Barber fails to show that these rights were clearly established at the time of the interviews, Miller enjoys qualified immunity.

Hurlman v. Rice

927 F.2d 74 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 4, 1991

The qualified immunity enjoyed by police officers protects them against a suit for damages “ ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982)), or, where the rights were clearly established, insofar as it was objectively reasonable to believe that their acts did not violate those rights

Tanner v. McMurray

989 F.3d 860 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 2, 2021

Endorsing the district court’s conclusion that Appellees are entitled to qualified immunity under Filarsky simply because they worked for the government through a contractor would establish a de facto functional test for … qualified immunity.

James McCreary v. Jeffery Richardson

738 F.3d 651 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 7, 2013

of particular conduct is clearly established.” … As this court has noted, an official: does not lose qualified immunity merely because a certain right is clearly established in the abstract.

David Engel v. J. Wendl, Larry Brimeyer

921 F.2d 148 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 31, 1991

The Court in Harlow established that in passing upon the issue of this qualified or “good faith” immunity, courts must apply an objective standard of reasonableness. Id.; Anderson v. … , Wendl and Brimeyer are not entitled to qualified immunity.