Case law

Robinson v. Prunty

249 F.3d 862 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 7, 2001

The defendants moved for summary judgment on the ground that they were entitled to qualified immunity. … “In order to determine whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, a court must (1) identify the right allegedly violated, (2) determine whether the right was ‘clearly established,’ and (3) determine whether a

Picray v. Sealock

138 F.3d 767 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 9, 1998

He contends that each of these bases of immunity was clearly established at the time of his arrest. We disagree. … None of Picray’s asserted bases of immunity from arrest were “clearly established” at the time of his arrest.

Hameed v. Mann

57 F.3d 217 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 15, 1995

The district court dismissed the complaint against Selsky on the ground that he was entitled to absolute immunity. Thereafter, in Young v. … to qualified immunity.

Michael A. Kroll v. United States Capitol Police

847 F.2d 899 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 21, 1988

Kroll did not constitute the violation of a “clearly established” right within the meaning of Harlow . … Under Harlow and its progeny, defendants’ entitlement to qualified immunity raises only a narrow question.

Park v. Shiflett

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 17, 2001

The determination of whether qualified immunity exists is ultimately a question for the court. The standard used for determining qualified immunity is an "objectively reasonable" standard. … The court does not look to the sub- jective intent of the officer in granting qualified immunity.

Muschette v. Gionfriddo

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 7, 2018

“Qualified immunity protects officials from liability for civil damages as  long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or  constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”   … Torreso, 764 F.3d  217, 237 (2d Cir. 2014) (“An officer is not entitled to qualified immunity on the grounds  that the law is not clearly established every time a novel method is used to inflict  injury.” 

Springer v. Placer County

338 F. App'x 587 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 18, 2009

We follow a two-pronged approach when analyzing qualified immunity. … Morris confronted that her conduct was unlawful under clearly established law.

Wooten v. Campbell

49 F.3d 696 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 6, 1995

Under the qualified immunity standards, Wooten fails to demonstrate that the defendants violated a clearly established right. It was not  I. … Under the qualified immunity defense, the defendants are immune from liability if Wooten's complaint fails to state a violation of a "clearly established statutory or constitutional right[ ] of which a reasonable person

William Willson v. Thomas Yerke

604 F. App'x 149 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 11, 2015

immunity from § 1983 claims for damages unless the facts alleged by the plaintiff show the violation of a constitutional right, and the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct. 5 Here … qualified immunity on this basis as well.

Moses Stryker v. City of Homewood

978 F.3d 769 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 20, 2020

Qualified immunity is a doctrine that shields public officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … violated was clearly established.”

Kenneth Miller v. Michael Wenerowicz

648 F. App'x 161 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 2, 2016

Id. at 89.2 Even if a prison official’s restriction on the right to marry is unconstitutional under the Turner test, however, the official is immune from suit unless the right at issue was “clearly established.” … Even if a “robust consensus” of persuasive authority could clearly establish a right, Taylor v. Barkes, 135 S.

Sanchez v. Guzman

105 F.4th 1285 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 28, 2024

established law prong of the qualified-immunity test. … entitled to qualified immunity.

Dale D. Hoover v. Patricia Radabaugh

307 F.3d 460 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 3, 2002

Clearly Established Constitutional Rights As noted above, the Sixth Circuit uses a two-part test to determine whether an official is protected by qualified immunity. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982): clearly established rights, for the purpose of qualified immunity, are “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Nicholas Roberson v. James Torres

770 F.3d 398 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 21, 2014

We have jurisdiction over this question on interlocutory review because it asks whether the facts, as alleged, indicate a violation of clearly established law, such that the denial of qualified immunity was appropriate. … , and (2) whether that right was clearly established.”

David Carter v. Timothy Filbeck

821 F.3d 1310 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 3, 2016

An official like Filbeck, who asserts entitlement to qualified immunity, must first establish that he was acting within the scope of his discretionary authority. … Overcoming the official’s qualified-immunity defense requires a plaintiff to establish both that the officer’s conduct violated a constitutionally protected right and that the right was clearly established at the time

Diane Zion v. Samuel Nassan

556 F. App'x 103 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 30, 2014

Officials benefit from qualified immunity unless their conduct violates clearly established law. Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 131 S. Ct. 2074, 2080 (2011). … We must therefore determine whether it was clearly established that if the facts alleged by the plaintiffs are true, the officers’ actions were unconstitutional.

Cromer v. Brown

88 F.3d 1315 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 15, 1996

The doctrine of qualified immunity would provide Sheriff Brown, in his individual capacity, with a full defense to Cromer's § 1983 charges if Brown's conduct did not "violate clearly established statu- tory or constitutional … If the law supporting the allegedly violated rights was not clearly established, then immunity must lie.

Henderson v. DeRobertis

940 F.2d 1055 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 15, 1991

In its judgment, the district court said it could not “find the right plaintiffs asserted under the facts of this case to have been clearly established in 1982 to remove defendants’ qualified immunity.” … The district judge’s post-verdict finding of a lack of any clearly established constitutional right under the facts of this case was erroneous, as was his resulting grant of the protection of qualified immunity to the defendants

Correll Thomas v. C. Dillard

818 F.3d 864 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 5, 2016

Because it was not clearly established at the time, that the perceived domestic violence nature of an investigation was .insufficient to establish reasonable suspicion, however, we hold Dillard is entitled to qualified immunity … He contends it was clearly established that Dillard’s conduct was unconstitutional when the events took place in September 2010, and.Dillard therefore is not entitled to qualified immunity.

Harlow v. Fitzgerald

457 U.S. 800 · Supreme Court of the United States · Jun 24, 1982

On summary judgment, the judge appropriately may determine, not only the currently applicable law, but whether that law was clearly established at the time an action occurred. 32 If the law at that time was not clearly established … If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily *819 should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct.