Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersF

10,000+ results

0.71s

  • Zulema Longoria v. San Benito Indep Con Sch Dist

    942 F.3d 258 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 4, 2019

    A defendant is entitled to qualified immunity if his “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … We therefore turn to the second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis and find that, regardless of whether M.L.’s rights were violated, the right at issue was not clearly established. See Davis v.

    Cited 64 timesPublished
  • Walter Melton v. David Abston

    841 F.3d 1207 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 18, 2016

    Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects “government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Sullivan is not entitled to qualified immunity. See Mercado v.

    Cited 342 timesPublished
  • Cottone v. Jenne

    326 F.3d 1352 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 11, 2003

    [u]nless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” Id. … The Supreme Court has established a two-part test to determine the applicability of qualified immunity.

    Abrogated in part, on other grounds by Randall v. Scott, 610 F.3d 701 (2010)Cited 382 timesPublished
  • Babinski v. Sosnowsky

    79 F.4th 515 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 21, 2023

    To defeat qualified immunity, Babinski must satisfy the clearly established prong of the analysis. … The district court denied the university and its officials qualified immunity. Id. A panel of this court reversed, explaining that “the ‘sine qua non of the clearly- established inquiry is “fair warning.”’”

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Darryl Pernell Butler v. Hope Davis

    Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 21, 2019

    immunity because Butler’s right was not clearly established. … See Glasscox, 903 F.3d at 1213 (explaining that, to defeat a defense of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show that “(1) the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) this right was clearly established at the

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Estate of Williams v. Indiana State Police Department

    797 F.3d 468 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 13, 2015

    ‘clearly established.’” … “Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined as a right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.” Id. at 1776.

    Cited 83 timesPublished
  • Naylor v. State of LA

    123 F.3d 855 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 9, 1997

    First, the court determines whether the plaintiff has alleged the violation of a clearly established constitutional right. … objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law, to a given set of facts."14 Accordingly, this case fits squarely within that class of unappealable, fact-based qualified immunity orders contemplated by

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • Amy Hughes v. Andrew Kisela

    841 F.3d 1081 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 28, 2016

    The Supreme Court has explained that “[t]he doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … “In determining whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, we consider (1) whether there has been a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the officer

    Reversed on other grounds by Kisela v. Hughes, 138 S. Ct. 1148 (2018)Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Dustin Burnikel v. Michael Fong

    886 F.3d 706 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 2, 2018

    Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in a § 1983 action unless their conduct violates a clearly established right of which a reasonable official would have known. Harlow v. … We affirm the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to Fong and Wessels.

    Cited 67 timesPublished
  • Raymond Barton v. Sheldon Neeley

    114 F.4th 581 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 27, 2024

    If the public-official defendant did not violate a constitutional right, or if he did but the right was not clearly established at the time of the violation, then the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. … Therefore, the court denied qualified immunity because it was “clearly established that the First Amendment protect[s] a citizen’s decision both as to what to say and No. 23-2089 Barton v.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Smith v. Lomax

    45 F.3d 402 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 22, 1995

    Then we ask, on the issue of qualified immunity, whether precedent clearly established that such conduct violated the Equal Protection Clause. … her of a clearly established property right.

    Cited 199 timesPublished
  • United States Ex Rel. Vaughn v. United Biologics, L.L.C.

    907 F.3d 187 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 16, 2018

    Univ., 171 F.3d 279, 290–94 (5th Cir. 1999) (holding that Eleventh Amendment immunity was not waived on this basis). … But this principle of interpretation, known as the “Series-Qualifier Canon,” applies only when context clearly establishes that it is intended. Reading Law at 147–51.

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Gerald Johnson v. Mike Moody

    903 F.3d 766 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 10, 2018

    To defeat a motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, the plaintiff must put forth facts showing that the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and that the right was clearly established at the … Callahan expressly authorized, that Moody and Mathis were entitled to qualified immunity from the Count I claims, not simply because the law was not clearly established, but because their conduct in investigating did not

    Cited 51 timesPublished
  • Altovese Williams v. City of Burlington, Iowa

    27 F.4th 1346 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 9, 2022

    Chiprez appeals the denial of qualified immunity. This court affirms. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects public officials from personal liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Don Karns v. Kathleen Shanahan

    879 F.3d 504 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 11, 2018

    However, as in Fields itself, this right was not clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct. … Accordingly, although the right identified by Karns and Parker is now clearly established in this Circuit, our qualified immunity analysis in this case remains unchanged. See Brosseau v.

    Cited 249 timesPublished
  • Dr. Lana Foster v. Shannon King

    Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 18, 2026

    But the second question, whether the law is clearly established, presents a set of doctrinal challenges unique to qualified immunity. … Accordingly, we address only step two of the qualified immunity analysis: whether the alleged conduct violated clearly established law.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Michtavi v. Scism

    808 F.3d 203 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 19, 2015

    She also concluded that the Defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity because Eighth Amendment jurisprudence clearly establishes that prison officials may not be indifferent to a serious medical need. … “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Intervarsity Christian Fellows v. University of Iowa

    5 F.4th 855 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 16, 2021

    immunity because the law was not clearly established. … As for qualified immunity, the court denied the individual defendants qualified immunity on the free speech and association claims, finding that the law was clearly established that the University could not discriminate based

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Pyle v. Woods

    874 F.3d 1257 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 1, 2017

    Database was not clearly established. … As in the Pyle matter, the district court concluded Detective Woods and Mayor Cullimore were entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutional right at issue was not clearly established.

    Cited 60 timesPublished
  • Hynson v. City of Chester

    827 F.2d 932 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 2, 1987

    In reviewing the denial of a defendant’s claim of qualified immunity, our determination is limited to the purely legal question of whether the facts alleged support a violation of clearly established law: An appellate court … clearly established at the time of the conduct at issue.

    Cited 21 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.