Case law

Rondigo, L.L.C. v. Township of Richmond

641 F.3d 673 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 1, 2011

P. 12(b)(6), so we review an assertion of qualified immunity to determine only whether the complaint ‘adequately alleges the commission of acts that violated clearly established law.’” (quoting Mitchell v. … When the qualified immunity defense is raised at the pleading stage, the court must determine only whether the complaint “adequately alleges the commission of acts that violated clearly established law.”

Ronald Mendoza v. Sherman Block, Los Angeles County

27 F.3d 1357 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 31, 1994

“[W]hen qualified immunity is at stake, [however], a court must first determine whether the law has been clearly established.” Romero, 931 F.2d at 628 . … Objective Reasonableness If the law governing an official’s conduct is clearly established, qualified immunity is available if a reasonable official could have believed the conduct at issue was lawful under that clearly established

David Picray v. Christopher Duffitt

652 F. App'x 497 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 6, 2016

established for purposes of qualified immunity. … Under the clearly established prong of qualified immunity, “[t]he dispositive question is ‘whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.’” Mullenix v. Luna, 136 S.

Oliveira v. Mayer

23 F.3d 642 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 28, 1994

Qualified Immunity As a general rule, police officers are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe … In the pending case, the District Court ruled as a matter of law that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity because “the law [was] clearly established” and “no reasonable officer would believe that the [defendants

Anthony J. Prisco, Jr. v. Dennis P. Talty, Individually T/a Zeitz and Talty Glenn A. Zeitz, Esq., Individually T/a Zeitz and Talty

993 F.2d 21 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 30, 1993

Based on well-established standards of statutory construction, we hold that, with one clearly stated exception, the 1984 amendments do not apply to a cause of action which had accrued prior to the effective date of their … There we concluded that the government’s conduct violated Prisco's clearly established constitutional due process rights.

Keith Cockrell v. City of Cincinnati

468 F. App'x 491 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 23, 2012

immunity still was appropriate, however, because law was not clearly established). … Because we resolve this case on the ‘clearly established' element of qualified immunity, we express no opinion on the constitutionality of Hall’s actions. .

Waseem Daker v. Neil Warren

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 3, 2022

. § 1983, for failure to state a claim and qualified immunity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. … (repeating that an of- ficial is entitled to qualified immunity unless the “unlawfulness of [his] conduct was ‘clearly established at the time’”).

Art Tobias v. Michael Arteaga

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 27, 2021

We reverse the denial of qualified immunity on Tobias’s Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process claim because it was not clearly established that the abusive  TOBIAS V. … Defendants fail to establish their entitlement to qualified immunity is ‘beyond controversy.’”

Fogarty v. Gallegos

523 F.3d 1147 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 18, 2008

On appeal, defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on both counts because Fogarty’s evidence falls short of establishing a deprivation of a clearly established constitutional right. … they violated was clearly established.

Tarver v. City of Edna

410 F.3d 745 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 25, 2005

reasonable in light of clearly established law at the time the challenged conduct occurred. … Under the second step of qualified immunity analysis, Tarver must establish that Officer Bubela’s conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.

Chiles v. Oklahoma Department of Corrections

467 F. App'x 801 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 15, 2012

Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 377 (2007) (holding that public officials are entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff demonstrates that there is “a violation of a constitutional right” and that right is “clearly established … Jones was entitled to qualified immunity because neither Ms.

Cecere v. City of New York

967 F.2d 826 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 26, 1992

The defense of qualified immunity shields governmental officials from civil liability if the official’s conduct did not violate constitutional rights that were clearly established at the pertinent time or if it was objectively … When a qualified immunity is asserted in a motion for summary judgment, of course, the facts material to the claim of qualified immunity must not be genuinely disputed. We believe that Puryear sustained his claim.

United States v. Granvel E. Windom

19 F.3d 1190 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 24, 1994

Windom’s concern that his memory might have faded “is insufficient to *1196 establish that the delay impaired his defense.” Brock, 782 F.2d at 1447 . … Clearly, in light of the prevailing standard in this circuit, the evidence was sufficient to support Windom’s conviction on Count Seven. 2.

Akande v. Grounds

555 F.3d 586 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 9, 2009

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages where their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … “clearly established” at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.

Rogers v. Pendleton

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 9, 2001

While a consensus of cases of persuasive authority may clearly establish a right for qualified immunity purposes, the inverse is also true: if there are no cases of controlling authority in the jurisdiction in question, and … if other appellate federal courts have split on the question of whether an asserted right exists, the right cannot be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes.

Jazmine Bryant v. Bill Hensley

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 19, 2024

In Hunter and Payne’s view, that response failed to argue that qualified immunity did not apply to them. True, Bryant’s estate bears the burden of showing that qualified immunity does not apply. See Blake v. … Edmonson County, 18 F.4th 516, 530 (6th Cir. 2021) (holding that the defendant acted in bad faith and was “not eligible for state qualified immunity” under Kentucky law because he violated the plaintiff’s “clearly established

Bunting v. Mellen

541 U.S. 1019 · Supreme Court of the United States · Apr 26, 2004

immunity. … The Court of Appeals concluded that Bunting is entitled to qualified immunity, id., at 376, and respondents have not challenged that ruling.

Tashonda Troupe v. St. Louis County, Missouri

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 11, 2025

“A public official is entitled to qualified immunity unless: (1) their conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) that right was clearly established.” Davis v. Buchanan Cnty., 11 F.4th 604, 623 (8th Cir. 2021). … “Qualified immunity is ‘appropriate where no reasonable fact finder could conclude that the facts when viewed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff show that the officers’ conduct violated a clearly established constitutional

Morales v. Chadbourne

793 F.3d 208 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jul 17, 2015

Donaghy argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity on Morales's Fourth Amendment claim because the law was not clearly established in 2009 that an ICE agent was required to have probable cause before issuing a detainer … For the reasons stated above, we affirm the district court's denial of qualified immunity on Morales's Fourth Amendment claim against Donaghy on the ground that the law was clearly established in 2009 that an ICE agent

White v. City Of Markham

310 F.3d 989 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 13, 2002

Qualified Immunity 7 The plaintiffs contend that the district court erred in dismissing the claims against Officer Muldrow and Chief Lymore based on qualified immunity. … The plaintiffs bear the burden of establishing the existence of a clearly established constitutional right. See Rakovich v.