Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersF

10,000+ results

1.01s

  • Reece v. Groose

    60 F.3d 487 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 20, 1995

    was clearly established. … We also held that Anderson was not entitled to qualified immunity, because the right allegedly violated, freedom from unreasonable searches, was clearly established.

    Cited 52 timesPublished
  • Kauch v. Department for Children, Youth & Their Families

    321 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 14, 2003

    A three-part test is used to determine if an official is entitled to qualified immunity. First, a court considers whether "the plaintiff's allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation." … Second, we determine whether the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. Id.

    Cited 29 timesPublished
  • Galloway v. County of Nassau

    141 F.4th 417 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 26, 2025

    While we have disapproved tactics used in the photo 29 identifications here, we need not decide whether they violated clearly 30 established law; Lipson’s qualified immunity defense fails in any 31 event because he … But that subjective intent—absent some future development in the case law—does not affect the qualified immunity analysis. The procedures here did not violate clearly established law for being unduly suggestive.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Harper v. Lawrence County, Ala.

    592 F.3d 1227 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 6, 2010

    Were Harper’s rights clearly established at the time? … Were Harper’s rights clearly established at the time?

    Abrogated on other grounds by Randall v. Scott, 610 F.3d 701 (2010)Cited 184 timesPublished
  • Hanes v. Zurick

    578 F.3d 491 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 18, 2009

    that right was clearly established. … ” the court indicated that the right was clearly established.

    Cited 76 timesPublished
  • Felicia Dean v. Stephen McKinney

    976 F.3d 407 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Oct 2, 2020

    The doctrine of qualified immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity—controversial, contested, and binding—is a familiar rule. 1 The doctrine shields the officer from suit unless his conduct violated “clearly established … But in doing so, the Court recognized that there was no clearly established law at the time of the crash in 2014 and granted qualified immunity. Id.

    Cited 66 timesPublished
  • Wilkins v. City of Oakland

    350 F.3d 949 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 20, 2003

    This general evaluation of the constitutionality of the alleged conduct, however, is not sufficient; we must also determine whether the actions alleged violate a clearly established constitutional right, where ‘clearly established … Even applying the step-by-step qualified immunity analysis outlined in Saucier, there is no question whether the officers’ actions in this case violated clearly established law. They did.

    Cited 163 timesPublished
  • A.N. v. Alamogordo Police Department

    928 F.3d 1191 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 8, 2019

    P. 12(b)(6) based on qualified immunity. … In other words, “[g]eneral statements of the law can clearly establish a right for qualified immunity purposes if they apply with obvious clarity to the specific conduct in question.”

    Cited 55 timesPublished
  • United States v. May

    Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 23, 2005

    The district court’s factual findings are upheld unless they are clearly erroneous, but its “legal conclusions as to the existence of probable cause are reviewed de novo.” United States v. … Greene, 250 F.3d 471, 480 (6th Cir. 2001) (“Sixth Circuit precedent clearly establishes that the affiant need only specify that the confidential informant has given accurate information in the past to qualify as reliable.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Shaniz West v. City of Caldwell

    931 F.3d 978 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 25, 2019

    Principles Governing Qualified Immunity Police officers have qualified immunity for their official conduct unless (1) they violate a federal statutory or constitutional right and (2) that right was clearly established … established case law in qualified immunity cases.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Ramona Hinojosa v. Brad Livingston

    807 F.3d 657 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 18, 2015

    If true, this would defeat a qualified immunity defense, because it would establish that Defendants subjected Hinojosa to extreme temperatures without adequate remedial measures, in violation of our circuit’s clearly established … light of clearly established law.

    Cited 134 timesPublished
  • Jerry Nelson v. Keyvon Sellers

    89 F.4th 1289 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 5, 2024

    clearly established law.” … Nelson’s Right Was Clearly Established. All that remains is “the clearly established prong of the qual- ified immunity inquiry.” Helm v.

    Cited 47 timesPublished
  • Rochelle Scott v. Kyle Smith

    109 F.4th 1215 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 30, 2024

    However, because that right was not clearly established at the time of the officers’ conduct, the officers were entitled to qualified immunity. … Because the applicable law was clearly established at the time of the incident, we affirm the denial of qualified immunity for Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment claim.

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Herman Louis Dimartini v. Lynn Jay Ferrin, Special Agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation

    889 F.2d 922 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 21, 1989

    immunity, arguing that his actions, even as alleged, did not violate clearly established fifth amendment rights. … Government officials performing discretionary functions enjoy qualified immunity, from liability for civil damages as long as their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

    Cited 66 timesPublished
  • Armstrong v. City Of Melvindale

    432 F.3d 695 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 6, 2006

    Qualified Immunity Framework 8 Qualified immunity shields public officials who perform discretionary functions from the necessity of defending against tort liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established … right was clearly established."

    Cited 71 timesPublished
  • Karen Heeter v. Kenneth Bowers

    99 F.4th 900 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 29, 2024

    Clearly Established Law on Excessive Force The next step of the qualified immunity analysis asks us to determine whether the law was clearly established at the time of the violation. … This standard overlaps with our qualified immunity analysis because officers act in a “wanton or reckless” manner when they violate an individual’s clearly established constitutional rights.

    Cited 59 timesPublished
  • Wetherbe v. Texas Tech University

    138 F.4th 296 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 20, 2025

    is qualified immunity. … However, “the ‘clearly established’ qualified immunity standard . . . . does not require that causation be clearly established,” 40 so we need not address element four.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Maldonado v. Fontanes

    568 F.3d 263 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jun 4, 2009

    It is clear from the Supreme Court's description of the second, "clearly established" step of the qualified immunity analysis that the second step, in turn, has two aspects. … These are principles of law, and the law was sufficiently recognized by courts to be clearly established. See Wilson v.

    Questioned by Brenes-Laroche v. Toledo Davila, 682 F. Supp. 2d 179 (2010)Cited 550 timesPublished
  • United Pet Supply, Inc. v. City of Chattanooga, Tennessee

    768 F.3d 464 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 18, 2014

    An assertion of qualified immunity may be overcome if the defendants violated a clearly established constitutional right. … Accordingly, the seizure violated a clearly established Fourth Amendment right, and so Walsh is not entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. III.

    Cited 81 timesPublished
  • Navarro v. Block

    250 F.3d 729 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 11, 2001

    After reviewing the legal standards for qualified immunity, the court held: [T]he law is not clearly established that a policy of indemnifying punitive damage awards violates constitutional rights.... … Though much of the analysis under qualified immunity and the merits of a § 1983 claim overlaps, the issue of whether a right is “clearly established” is relevant only to qualified immunity.

    Cited 2,375 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.