Case law

Lowrance v. Achtyl

20 F.3d 529 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 29, 1994

immunity. … That burden having been met, the burden then shifted to the defendants to establish that Aehtyl would have issued the report in the absence of the improper reason.

Patrick Booker v. South Carolina Department of Corrections

855 F.3d 533 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 28, 2017

Qualified immunity protects officials “who commit constitutional violations *538 but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably believe that their actions were lawful.” Id. … established law for purposes of adjudging entitlement to qualified immunity.”

Moore v. Vega

371 F.3d 110 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 10, 2004

entitlement to qualified immunity. … : qualified immunity protects that officer unless' his performance was in violation of clearly established law, or was plainly incompetent.

Abby Martin v. Chancellor for The Board of Regents of The University System Georgia

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 22, 2023

Cannon, 174 F.3d 1271, 1288 n.11 (1999) (“This Circuit has held that dicta cannot clearly establish the law for qualified immunity purposes.”); Hamilton v. … For a broad, clearly established principle to prevent qualified immunity from applying, “the principle must be established with ‘obvious clarity’ by the case law so that ‘every objectively reasonable

Brown v. Department of the Navy

493 U.S. 831 · Supreme Court of the United States · Oct 2, 1989

Cuevas v. De Roco

531 F.3d 726 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 27, 2008

Qualified Immunity Deputy Starr nonetheless contends that he is protected by qualified immunity. … Moreover, Deputy Starr is not protected by qualified immunity.

Zamsky v. Hansell

933 F.2d 677 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 17, 1991

The cost of establishing the defense of qualified immunity is simply part of the price of having a viable remedy for constitutional violations; it is not a sufficient reason, in and of itself, for finding governmental actors … After all, officials who don’t violate clearly recognized rights will be entitled to qualified immunity — and will not be liable — regardless of how this case is decided.

Glik v. Cunniffe

655 F.3d 78 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Aug 26, 2011

qualified immunity, as it did not -- and could not -- assert such a defense. … Was the Right to Film Clearly Established? Though the "clearly established" inquiry does "not require a case directly on point," al-Kidd, 131 S.

Betances v. Fischer

837 F.3d 162 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 16, 2016

violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … This panel is bound by Vincent’s rulings as to what was clearly established by Earley I.

Crawford v. Davis

109 F.3d 1281 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 27, 1997

These defendants will merit qualified immunity unless their alleged conduct violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights,” Harlow v. … Crawford’s clearly established statutory and constitutional rights under the circum *1285 stances. With respect to Ms.

Tennison v. City and County of San Francisco

570 F.3d 1078 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 23, 2009

The Inspectors moved for summary judgment on the basis of absolute and qualified immunity. … The Inspectors also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Kinney v. Weaver

367 F.3d 337 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 19, 2004

Yet, at the same time, an official does not lose qualified immunity merely because a certain right is clearly established in the abstract. … It is true that, even without judicial interpretation, violation of a statute can be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes.

Jemmott v. Coughlin

85 F.3d 61 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 23, 1996

The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that officers performing discretionary functions are immune from liability for civil damages if their conduct either “did not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable … Given this finding, and the fact that defendants are accused of violating what they reasonably should have known is a clearly established right, we decline to grant qualified immunity to the defendants.

Tuttle v. Sepolio

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 23, 2023

Several of the officers moved to dismiss, asserting qualified immunity. … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985) (“Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement

Hayden v. Green

640 F.3d 150 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 5, 2011

that right was clearly established in light of the specific context of the case. … We reverse the district court’s order denying qualified immunity, and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Wright v. South Arkansas Regional Health Center, Inc.

800 F.2d 199 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 2, 1986

violation of clearly established law." … If properly supported, such an allegation could make out a violation of clearly established law and might defeat a motion for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity.

Holzemer v. City of Memphis

621 F.3d 512 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 15, 2010

She further argues that if the conversation were protected petitioning, she would be entitled to qualified immunity because that right was not clearly established. … For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district court’s denial of qualified immunity.

Waterman v. Batton

393 F.3d 471 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 3, 2005

Thus, government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages to the extent that “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … established’ for qualified immunity purposes” and that “ ‘[c]learly established’ in this context includes not only already specifically adjudicated rights, but those manifestly included within more general applications of

Roska Ex Rel. Roska v. Peterson

304 F.3d 982 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 5, 2002

Whether the law was “clearly established.” … Amendment principle was “clearly established.”

Estate of Marvin L. Booker v. Gomez

745 F.3d 405 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 11, 2014

Qualified Immunity—clearly established law Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because their actions did -40- not violate clearly established law. … Booker’s serious medical need and (b) this would violate clearly established law, we affirm the district court’s denial of qualified immunity. a.