Case law

Strand v. Minchuk

910 F.3d 909 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 8, 2018

For the law to be clearly established-the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis-the "existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate." … This same factual dispute also prevents us from concluding, as Officer Minchuk urges, that Strand's clearly established constitutional rights were not violated, the second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry.

Moore v. Andreno

505 F.3d 203 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 22, 2007

A defendant will be entitled to qualified immunity if either (1) his actions did not violate clearly established law or (2) it was objectively reasonable for him to believe that his actions did not violate clearly established … Because we believe that, at the time of the search, the law was not clearly established as to whether Sines had authority to consent to a search of the study, Deputies Andreno and Palmer are entitled to qualified immunity

Miles LaCross v. City of Duluth

713 F.3d 1155 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 8, 2013

-3- Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability and the burdens of litigation in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established … Accordingly, Mark is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate LaCross’s then clearly established constitutional rights.

Holly Schulkers v. Elizabeth Kammer

955 F.3d 520 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 30, 2020

A right is clearly established for purposes of overcoming the qualified immunity defense when existing precedent has “placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate.” White v. Pauly, 137 S. … established prong of the qualified immunity analysis.”

United States v. Abel Casarez-Bravo, D.C. No

181 F.3d 1074 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 22, 1999

B Although the 1986 conviction did not-qualify as a predicate conviction, the district court only needed to find two qualifying predicate convictions for Casarez-Bravo to be considered a career criminal under the Sentencing … United States, 511 U.S. 485 , 114 S.Ct. 1732 , 128 L.Ed.2d 517 (1994). 1 In addition to the statutory definition, we may also examine “ ‘documentation or judicially noticeable facts that clearly establish that the conviction

Donald Jackson v. Pearl Public School Distr

626 F. App'x 80 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 15, 2015

Although we express no opinion as to whether the school officials’ conduct was constitutionally infirm, we conclude that the school officials are entitled to qualified immunity because it was not “clearly established” in … Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff shows (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was “clearly established” at the

George Wingate v. Scott Fulford

987 F.3d 299 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 4, 2021

The burden of establishing a qualified immunity defense rests on the official asserting the defense. Meyers v. Baltimore County, 713 F.3d 723, 731 (4th 2013). … But because this right was not clearly established at the time of the arrest, the Officers are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. 21

Berg v. N.Y.C. Police Comm'r

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 25, 2018

  we  determine  they  violated a  clearly  established  right.  … Vega, 371 F.3d 110,  8 116  (2d  Cir.  2004)  (stating  that  where  qualified  immunity  is  based  on  9 claimed special need to search parolee’s residence, the issue “is whether, in  10 light of clearly established

Occupy Columbia v. Nikki Haley

738 F.3d 107 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 16, 2013

In addressing Appellants’ qualified immunity arguments, the district court first agreed with Appellants “that it was not clearly established at the time … June 12, 2013) (denying qualified immunity for state officials and holding that “plaintiffs had a clearly established right to utilize the Plaza to engage in overnight protest activity”).

Machete Productions, L.L.C. v. Heather Page

809 F.3d 281 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 28, 2015

4 To overcome an official’s qualified immunity, a plaintiff must plead facts demonstrating “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of … Accordingly, Machete cannot establish that it had a clearly established right to these funds that Morales violated. See Ashcroft, 131 S. Ct. at 2080.

Sims v. Metropolitan Dade County

972 F.2d 1230 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 18, 1992

The current doctrine covers the state official’s discretionary actions with the cloak of qualified immunity so long as the official’s actions do not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have … ’s actions violated clearly established rights.

Canary v. Osborn

211 F.3d 324 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 3, 2000

It is the defendants’ burden to establish the the title of one of its substitute teachers, it voted to not renew existence of absolute legislative immunity. See Kamplain v. … as established by Bogan v.

Kennedy v. City of Ridgefield

439 F.3d 1055 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 7, 2006

Southwest Airlines, 124 F.3d 1103, 1107 (9th Cir.1997) ("[W]e have jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity where the appeal focuses on whether the defendants violated a clearly established … I would hold that, taking into account the "specific context of th[is] case," the right was not clearly established at the time Officer Shields acted, and Shields is thus entitled to qualified immunity.

Garcia v. Does 1-40

779 F.3d 84 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 21, 2014

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability for civil damages when one of two conditions is satisfied: (a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was … Defendants bear the burden of establishing qualified immunity. Vincent v. Yelich, 718 F.3d 157, 166 (2d Cir.2013).

Jermaine Sutton v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville

700 F.3d 865 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 28, 2012

the right was clearly established. … Still, taking the facts alleged in the complaint as true, Sutton’s constitutional rights were clearly established in this context and the court properly concluded that the qualified-immunity defense fails at this juncture

Gwynn H. GILLIAM, Appellant, v. CITY OF OMAHA, a Municipal Corporation, Et Al., Appellees

524 F.2d 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 28, 1975

We affirm for the reason that we fail to find on this record that the district court’s findings, that the claim of racial or sexual discrimination has not been established, are clearly erroneous. … Thus the city of Omaha would clearly be liable for any judgment rendered against it and therefore, the state cannot be considered the real party of interest for purposes of determining Eleventh Amendment immunity.

Lundgren v. Freeman

307 F.2d 104 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 27, 1962

Civ.P., which provides that: “findings of fact shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous * * Therefore, we may not substitute our judgment if conflicting inferences may be drawn from the established facts by reasonable … Like the issue of wrongful purpose, we feel that the issue as to the existence of quasi-arbitrators’ qualified immunity is a question of fact.

John Doe v. Joan Delie

257 F.3d 309 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 24, 2001

Debates over defendants' qualified immunity typically turn on this "clearly established right" clause. … Davis, in short, concerned not the authorities a court may consider in determining qualified immunity, but this entirely discrete question: Is qualified immunity defeated where an appellee violates any clearly established

Armijo Ex Rel. Armijo Sanchez v. Peterson

601 F.3d 1065 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 13, 2010

Qualified immunity “protects governmental officials 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 … The qualified immunity inquiry has two elements: whether a constitutional violation occurred, and whether the violated right was “clearly established” at the time of the violation. Pearson, 129 S.Ct. at 815-16 .

Terebesi v. Torreso

764 F.3d 217 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 21, 2014

But the doctrine of qualified immunity shields both state and federal officials from suit “unless [1] the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that [2] was clearly established at the time of the challenged … “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.” 20 Mendoza v.