Case law

F.E. Trotter, Inc. v. Watkins

869 F.2d 1312 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 10, 1989

were not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … Since no cases have so held, the violation was not clearly established, thus immunizing Navy appellees.

John Burk v. Linda L. Beene, Doctor, in Her Individual and Official Capacity as Director of the Arkansas State Board of Private Career Education

948 F.2d 489 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 7, 1991

Thus the qualified immunity question “generally turns on the ‘objective legal reasonableness’ of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.” … As the court stated, “Beene’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right because it was clearly established that the Fourth Amendment requires a truthful factual showing sufficient to constitute probable

Philip Rogers Scalice v. John Doe Davies, Sgt., Bill Weber Kurt Peterson, Superintendent Larry Kincheloe Linda Buccini, Defendants-Respondents

24 F.3d 249 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 17, 1994

Defendants' motion for summary judgment on the grounds of qualified immunity was granted by the district court. 1 We affirm. 3 We need only reach the issue of qualified immunity with respect to Scalice's claims against defendant … Even assuming that a policy prohibiting catalogs might violate a prisoner's First Amendment rights, we cannot say that such rights are so clearly established that Scalice's action survives defendant's qualified immunity defense

Occupy Nashville v. William Haslam

769 F.3d 434 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 8, 2014

the Plaza is not clearly established. … While qualified immunity can protect government officials for actions taken in the course of their duties, that protection is forfeited when an official’s conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional

Doug Morgan v. Plano Independent School Dist

755 F.3d 757 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 3, 2014

To overcome the qualified immunity defense at the pleading stage, Morgan must allege that the objectionable conduct violated a right that was “clearly established at the time.” Pearson v. … The prior cases had so clearly established the law that the plaintiff was able to overcome the presumption in favor of qualified immunity. Id. at 1030 .

Delma Jackson v. Warden Carl Humphrey

776 F.3d 1232 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 13, 2015

We properly have “jurisdiction to hear this interlocutory appeal of the denial of qualified immunity as the issue involves the determination of whether the official[s’] conduct violated clearly established law.” … clearly established law.”

Love v. Grashorn

134 F.4th 1109 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 22, 2025

established right, and  Officer Grashorn had qualified immunity even if he had been mistaken about the danger. 1 Ms. … Because Officer Grashorn asserted qualified immunity, the plaintiffs bear the initial burden of showing that (1) Officer Grashorn violated the Constitution and (2) this violation was clearly established. Verdecia v.

Maxcie Thomas, III v. Captain Houston Talley, Individually

251 F.3d 743 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 25, 2001

violate clearly established federal law, then the official would be entitled to *746 qualified immunity. … immunity typically, the issue whether the federal right alleg *747 edly infringed was ‘clearly established’ ” (emphasis in original).

Tara Cartier Donald Coates v. Paul D. Lussier, Individually and in His Official Capacity

955 F.2d 841 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Feb 5, 1992

the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.” … Briggs, 475 U.S. 335, 344-45 , 106 S.Ct. 1092, 1097-98 , 89 L.Ed.2d 271 (1986). *844 Thus, even where the law and the scope of permissible official conduct are clearly established, the defense of qualified immunity will protect

Oscar J. Fernandez, Etc. v. Francis T. Leonard

784 F.2d 1209 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Mar 6, 1986

immunity, and (2) that the constitutional violations alleged were not clearly established at the time of the shooting and that, therefore, the district court erred in denying his claim of qualified immunity. … The qualified immunity question in this case is whether defendant Leonard should have known he was violating clearly established constitutional rights of the plaintiffs. 1.

SAUCIER v. KATZ Et Al.

533 U.S. 194 · Supreme Court of the United States · Jun 18, 2001

S. 386 (1989), sets forth the objective reasonableness test for evaluating excessive force claims, a principle the Court of Appeals concluded was clearly established for qualified immunity purposes. … II The Court of Appeals ruled first that the right was clearly established; and second that the reasonableness inquiry into excessive force meant that it need not consider aspects of qualified immunity, leaving the whole

Kent Alexander v. William Perrill and Luis Rivera

916 F.2d 1392 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 10, 1990

The prison officials moved for summary judgment arguing that they were entitled to qualified immunity because Alexander’s rights were not “clearly established” and that, in any event, they acted reasonably in response to … The issue before us only involves the question whether a qualified immunity defense bars the claim. The issue, thus, as we have said earlier, is only whether there was a clearly established duty to investigate.

Garnier v. Rodriguez

506 F.3d 22 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Oct 22, 2007

Calderón Garnier could establish the requisite criteria of §1983 whereby (1) a constitutional right was violated, (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct, and (3) a reasonable official … We affirm the district court's conclusion that the qualified immunity defense was not established at this early stage of the litigation. Affirmed. -12-

Clarissa Gilmore v. Georgia Department of Corrections

111 F.4th 1118 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 29, 2024

But as we discuss, our prec- edent rejects that path to defeating qualified immunity. … qualified-immunity purposes.

Joseph Meadows v. City of Walker, Mich.

46 F.4th 416 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 18, 2022

We nonetheless held that qualified immunity was warranted because the rights were not clearly established where the officers could perceive at least some resistance, id. at 850, or the struggle was in progress. … Still, we granted qualified immunity because it was not “clearly established” that the officers’ use of force was excessive given that Stanfield “could reasonably have been perceived to be resisting.” Id. at 850.

Diaz-Bigio v. Santini

652 F.3d 45 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jun 29, 2011

A right is clearly established and immunity will not issue only if "every 'reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right.'" … '" for qualified immunity purposes.

Z. J. v. Kansas City Brd of Police Comm

931 F.3d 672 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 25, 2019

The "clearly established" requirement of qualified immunity provides officers with ample room for honest mistakes, but the SWAT team officers' conduct falls outside even this generous standard. … We do not decide whether the detectives' decision violated the Fourth Amendment but instead conclude they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate clearly established law.

Pearson v. Callahan

555 U.S. 223 · Supreme Court of the United States · Jan 21, 2009

Clause, but then granted the defendants qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established at the relevant time. … Because the unlawfulness of the officers’ conduct in this case was not clearly established, petitioners are entitled to qualified immunity.

Unseld Nance, Sr. v. Erik Sammis

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 10, 2009

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability under § 1983 when their conduct does not violate "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … The right of Farrow and Nance to be free from the use of deadly force was clearly established in June 2007.

Kovacic v. Villarreal

628 F.3d 209 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 17, 2010

Qualified immunity was created to insulate government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … No such constitutional law was then, or is now, clearly established.