Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersF

10,000+ results

1.13s

  • Daniel Simmonds v. Genesee County

    682 F.3d 438 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 19, 2012

    To satisfy the first Saucier prong and establish a constitutional violation to defeat the officers’ claim of qualified immunity, Simmonds “is obliged to present facts which if true would constitute a violation of clearly … the violation of the constitutional right was clearly established. 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

    Cited 48 timesPublished
  • Stamps Ex Rel. Estate of Stamps v. Town of Framingham

    813 F.3d 27 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 5, 2016

    The rules for granting qualified immunity are well established. … any Courts of Appeals . . . decline to consider district court precedent when determining if constitutional rights are clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity

    Cited 75 timesPublished
  • Athel B. Cooper, Cross-Appellee v. William E. Smith, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Camden County, Georgia

    89 F.3d 761 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 26, 1996

    applicable law was clearly established.” … For Cooper to pierce the qualified immunity protecting Smith, he must show that Smith violated one of Cooper’s “clearly established” rights under federal law. Id.

    Cited 32 timesPublished
  • Ciolino v. Gikas

    861 F.3d 296 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jun 28, 2017

    Qualified Immunity Framework Qualified immunity protects public officials from § 1983 suits for damages if their actions "d[id] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Ct. 1765, 1776 (2015) ("Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if 'clearly established' law can simply be defined as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.").

    Cited 34 timesPublished
  • David M. Mumford v. Joseph Zieba, Judge, in His Official and Individual Capacities Lorain County Common Pleas Court, Domestic Relations Division

    4 F.3d 429 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 1, 1993

    Moreover, Judge Zieba argued that he was protected from personal liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established on January 3, 1989 that a chief referee of a domestic relations … Steingut, 829 F.2d 317 (2d Cir.1987), granted state officials qualified immunity when they refused to reappoint a plaintiff to the position of workers’ compensation referee because federal law was not clearly established

    Cited 76 timesPublished
  • Elder v. Holloway

    984 F.2d 991 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 27, 1993

    Harlow shifted the inquiry in qualified immunity cases from the subjective good faith of the government officials to the objective reasonableness of their conduct in light of clearly established law. … The Court is merely restating its holding by emphasizing that to defeat a qualified immunity claim there must be an identity between the sued-on right and the clearly established right.

    Reversed by Elder v. Holloway, 510 U.S. 510 (1994)Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Thompson v. Upshur County TX

    245 F.3d 447 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 30, 2001

    To ensure that qualified immunity serves its intended purpose, it is of paramount import, during step two, to define “clearly established law” at the proper level of generality. Anderson v. … Thus, the issue as to sheriff Cross’s claim of qualified immunity is whether his policies were objectively reasonable in light of then clearly established law.

    Cited 32 timesPublished
  • Calvin B. Champion v. Outlook Nashville, Inc., Debbie Miller

    380 F.3d 893 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 19, 2004

    Qualified immunity provides “that government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … The court held that the district court’s grant of summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity was not proper because the officers had violated Drummond’s clearly established rights. Id. at 1062.

    Cited 415 timesPublished
  • Crittindon v. LeBlanc

    37 F.4th 177 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 10, 2022

    Nonetheless, the majority concludes three DPSC defendants violated plaintiffs’ clearly established right to timely release from prison and denies them qualified immunity. … Even still, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, because it is not clearly established that it violates the Constitution to hold a prisoner for 17 days while employing reasonable efforts to verify his sentence

    Cited 48 timesPublished
  • Banks v. Herbrich

    90 F.4th 407 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 3, 2024

    The district court denied DFPS’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that its employees were not entitled to qualified immunity because they violated clearly established law by removing R.B. … immunity analysis asks whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the misconduct.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Bamdad v. Drug Enforcement Administration

    617 F. App'x 7 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 22, 2015

    The doctrine of qualified immunity entitles officers to immunity from suit for damages unless their conduct violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … If the right in question was not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation, we need not decide whether it was in fact violated, because the officers are entitled to qualified immunity regardless.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Aldini v. Johnson

    609 F.3d 858 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 29, 2010

    Bodine was entitled to qualified immunity. … Under the “clearly established” inquiry, the question is whether the right was “so ‘clearly established’ that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.”

    Cited 146 timesPublished
  • Schatz Schatz Family v. Gierer

    346 F.3d 1157 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 16, 2003

    Where jurisdiction is appropriate, the scope of appeal is limited to the narrow issue of whether plaintiffs have alleged a violation of "clearly established" law. See Johnson v. … Jones, 515 U.S. 304, 313 , 115 S.Ct. 2151 , 132 L.Ed.2d 238 (1995). 4 The district court announced the proper standard for addressing qualified immunity at the Rule 12(b)(6) stage — whether immunity is established on the

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Cochran v. Gilliam

    656 F.3d 300 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 2, 2011

    a violation of clearly established law.” … Because the subject of the interlocutory appeal is limited to the pure legal issue of whether the facts alleged constitute a violation of clearly established law, “a defendant seeking qualified immunity must be willing to

    Cited 51 timesPublished
  • Hernandez v. Texas Department of Protective & Regulatory Services

    380 F.3d 872 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 31, 2004

    The qualified immunity analysis is a two-step inquiry. First, a court must decide whether a plaintiff’s allegation, if true, establishes a violation of a clearly established right. Hare v. … Even if the government official’s conduct violates a clearly established right, the official is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct was objectively reasonable.

    Cited 146 timesPublished
  • Amanda Pierner-Lytge v. Montrell Hobbs

    60 F.4th 1039 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 23, 2023

    Qualified Immunity “[O]fficers are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at … No. 22-1976 Under prong two, Pierner-Lytge must demonstrate that it was clearly established in April 2020 that probable cause to arrest her for disorderly conduct did not exist.

    Cited 39 timesPublished
  • Cuervo v. Sorenson

    112 F.4th 1307 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 30, 2024

    On appeal, Plaintiff contends the district court erred in dismissing her FAC on qualified immunity grounds. Defendants ask us to affirm the grant of qualified immunity. … We now examine the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis. We conclude Defendants violated Plaintiff’s clearly established Fourth Amendment rights.

    Cited 44 timesPublished
  • Sarita Merricks v. Jeffery Adkisson

    785 F.3d 553 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 15, 2015

    The Qualified Immunity Defense and the Clearly Established Requirement The qualified immunity defense “provides ample protection to all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” … established prong of the qualified immunity defense.

    Cited 40 timesPublished
  • Edward Sialoi v. City of San Diego

    823 F.3d 1223 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 24, 2016

    Whether the constitutional right was clearly established As with the three teenagers, the background circumstances on which the defendants rely to establish qualified immunity (the officers presence in a high-crime … Thus, Sandoval’s discussion of clearly established law applies equally here.

    Cited 32 timesPublished
  • Garrett v. Stratman

    254 F.3d 946 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 20, 2001

    of clearly established law.” … a violation of clearly established law.”

    Cited 320 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.