Case law

Whitaker v. Wisconsin Department of Health Services

849 F.3d 681 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 27, 2017

We agree with the district court that Whita- ker failed to establish that she was an “otherwise qualified” employee, as required by the Rehabilitation Act, and we af- firm the grant of summary judgment. I. … Since Whitaker failed to establish that she was an “other- wise qualified” employee, we need not address whether she properly requested an accommodation, or whether her ac- commodation request was reasonable.

Gould v. Davis

165 F.3d 265 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 31, 1998

We agree with the district court that the officers are not entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutional right at issue was clearly established at the time of the events in question and was a right of which a … The second prong of the qualified immunity analysis inquires whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time the alleged violation took place.

Mark Crawford v. Donavin Geiger

656 F. App'x 190 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 11, 2016

Legal Standards: Qualified Immunity and the Fourth Amendment “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … immunity analysis, “[t]he dispositive question is whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.”

Lewis v. Tripp

604 F.3d 1221 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 17, 2010

Lewis’s clearly established rights. … Lewis hasn’t demonstrated a constitutional violation, let alone a clearly established one.

Tate v. United States

72 F. App'x 265 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 8, 2003

The putative next friend must clearly establish “the propriety of his status” in order to “justify the jurisdiction of the court.” Whitmore, 495 U.S. at 164 . … Cockrell and Young did not satisfy the requirements to qualify for next Mend status.

Kohl v. Casson

5 F.3d 1141 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 28, 1993

Briggs, 475 U.S. 335, 342 , 106 S.Ct. 1092, 1097 , 89 L.Ed.2d 271 (1986), the Court held that the function of seeking an arrest warrant is subject only to qualified immunity, not absolute immunity. … and enjoys only qualified immunity, just as the police officer was held to have in Malley .

Oladeinde v. Birmingham, City of

230 F.3d 1275 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 16, 2000

Applicability of Qualified Immunity for First Amendment Claims Chief Deutsch and Captain Walker contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate clearly established law. … "Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity 'insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Lewis Floyd, Jr., vs Duane Corder

426 F. App'x 790 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 13, 2011

To defeat qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show that “(1) the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) this right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” Id. … immunity because his actions did not violate Floyd’s “clearly established rights.”

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.

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.

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.

Torchinsky v. Siwinski

942 F.2d 257 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 9, 1991

A. 12 The basic purposes of qualified immunity bear repeating. … This objective test involves an inquiry into whether a government official has violated "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v.

Lee v. Mihalich

847 F.2d 66 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 17, 1988

In furtherance of these policies, the discriminant for qualified immunity focuses on the objective legal reasonableness of an official’s acts under law which has been clearly established at the time he acts. … A government official will be denied qualified immunity for having violated a clearly established right when “in the light of preexisting law the unlawfulness [is] apparent.” Anderson, 107 S.Ct. at 3039 .

Eugene F. Assaf v. George C. Fields Gary E. Crowell

178 F.3d 170 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 19, 1999

Nonetheless, it held that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that Assaf could not be fired for political reasons. See id. at 633. III. … to qualified immunity.

Suasnavas v. Stover

196 F. App'x 647 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 25, 2006

court’s denial of qualified immunity. … “[W]here the right is clearly established, a defendant should only rarely be able to succeed with a qualified immunity defense.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). Gomes, 451 F.3d at 1134-35. D.

Bass v. Richards

308 F.3d 1081 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 14, 2002

It is subject to appeal, however, when the defendants are public officials asserting a qualified immunity defense and the appealed issue is whether a given set of facts establishes that defendants violated clearly established … Instead, Appellants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because Bass’ right to affiliate himself with Vorhies, an unannounced candidate, was not clearly established at the time his commission was removed.

Sommer Richards v. Lvmpd

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 14, 2023

immunity is raised, plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that alleged right was clearly established). … Because Richards has not established that the alleged right in this case was clearly established at the time of her encounter with Wills, Wills is entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity.2 2

Arthur Clark Melissa Clark v. Earl Link R.E. Combs, and Charles Britt Fredrickia Britt Frank Stanley

855 F.2d 156 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 16, 1988

Since the issue in this appeal is the validity of the deputies’ plea of qualified immunity, we consider first the principles governing qualified immunity. We take it as clearly established that under Malley v. … by showing that those rights were clearly established at the time of the conduct at issue.

Allaedhin Qandah v. Michael McKee

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 8, 2022

Koehler, 616 F.3d 855, 861 (8th Cir. 2010) (limiting appellate review of denial of qualified immunity to determining whether conduct, as factually supported under summary judgment standard, violated a plaintiff’s clearly … established rights).

Michael Lacey v. Joseph Arpaio

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 29, 2012

Second, we must ask “whether the right was clearly estab- lished.” Id. A right is clearly established if “it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he confronted.” … Only when an officer’s conduct violates a clearly established constitu- tional right—when the officer should have known he was vio- lating the Constitution—does he forfeit qualified immunity.