Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.50s
Amir M. Meshal v. Commissioner, Georgia Department of Public Safety
117 F.4th 1273 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 16, 2024
The officers moved to dismiss the complaint on qualified-immunity grounds, arguing that Meshal failed to allege a violation of clearly established law. … The district court’s qualified-immunity ruling should be re- versed only if the existence of the affirmative defense of qualified immunity “clearly appears on the face of the complaint.”
Cited 6 timesPublished576 F. App'x 394 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 31, 2014
Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials acting within their discretionary authority are immune from civil liability for damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights … The test for qualified immunity is twofold: (1) “whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right;” and (2) “whether the defendant’s conduct was objectively unreasonable in light
Cited 6 timesPublished971 F.2d 298 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 24, 1992
II QUALIFIED IMMUNITY We review a district court’s denial of a qualified immunity defense de novo. Baker v. Racansky, 887 F.2d 183, 185 (9th Cir.1989). … When a law enforcement officer asserts qualified immunity from liability for civil rights violations, the district court must determine whether, in light of clearly established principles governing the conduct in question
Cited 13 timesPublishedJones v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department
873 F.3d 1123 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 20, 2017
Clearly Established Law - Because defendants may have committed constitutional violations, we turn to the second element of' qualified immunity: whether there was clearly established law. Defendants rely on Brooks v. … qualified immunity).
Cited 85 timesPublishedRandall R. Bradford v. Mike Huckabee
330 F.3d 1038 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 5, 2003
Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity in suits against them in their individual capacity as long as their actions do not violate "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense, to be upheld in a motion to dismiss only when the immunity can be established on the face of the complaint.
Cited 15 timesPublished23 F.4th 517 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 13, 2022
Sheriff Blackwell asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … A plaintiff seeking to defeat qualified immunity must show that (1) the official violated a statutory or constitutional right and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the conduct. Morgan v.
Cited 17 timesPublished605 F.3d 1091 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 24, 2010
was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct. … Clearly Established Law Deputy Burkhalter entitles a section of his opening brief, “A Reasonable Person in Defendant’s Position Would Not Have Recognized That Deputy Burkhalter’s Actions Violated a Clearly Established
Cited 12 timesPublishedJacoby Garrett v. Harold Clarke
74 F.4th 579 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 25, 2023
“Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from personal-capacity liability for civil damages under § 1983, insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Therefore, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity unless “(1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time
Cited 19 timesPublished189 F.3d 989 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 30, 1999
Finally, we consider de novo a denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity to the extent that the parties raise the “purely legal” issue of whether the right allegedly violated was clearly established. … . *994 In order to determine whether the council defendants should receive qualified immunity, we must consider (1) whether the law governing the official’s conduct was clearly established and (2) whether, given this clearly
Cited 55 timesPublished658 F.3d 819 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 7, 2011
“Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known … “Qualified immunity involves the following two-step inquiry: (1) whether the facts shown by the plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) whether that right was clearly established at
Cited 85 timesPublished55 F.4th 1164 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 22, 2022
The district court found a genuine dispute of material fact about whether there was probable cause to stop the van and also found the law governing the stop was clearly established. … Similarly, to determine whether Jansen violated clearly established law, we need to know what happened.
Cited 1 timesPublishedMarvin Reeves v. Lt. Jacob King
774 F.3d 430 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 16, 2014
King is “entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) ‘the facts alleged or shown, construed in the light most favorable to [Reeves], establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right,’ and (2) the ‘right was clearly … In Irving, 519 F.3d at 451, we affirmed the district court’s order denying qualified immunity because it was clearly established at that time that labeling an inmate a snitch would unreasonably subject the inmate to a substantial
Cited 8 timesPublishedOlsen v. Idaho State Board of Medicine
363 F.3d 916 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 7, 2004
Additionally, the Board’s proceedings are clearly adversarial, a proposition which is not in dispute. … We have previously explained that acts occurring during - a disciplinary hearing process clearly fall within the scope of absolute immunity. Mishler, 191 F.3d at 1008 .
Cited 10 timesPublishedErnest Jackson, Sr. v. Raymond Hoylman and Robert Bidwell
933 F.2d 401 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 22, 1991
The court then considered the qualified immunity motion and concluded that because qualified immunity turns on the same objective reasonableness standard that the claim of excessive turns on, defendants must be denied summary … be determined before trial whether the defendant did acts that violate clearly established rights.
Cited 31 timesPublishedAngel Mendez v. County of Los Angeles
815 F.3d 1178 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 2, 2016
The court also held that its conclusions in each respect were supported by clearly established law and that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity. … In the absence of clearly established law that squarely governs the situation here, qualified immunity is appropriate on the knock-and-announce claim. Id. at 309.
Overruled on other grounds by County of Los Angeles v. Mendez, 137 S. Ct. 1539 (2017)Cited 14 timesPublished288 F.3d 1254 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 3, 2002
When a § 1983 defendant raises the defense of qualified immunity on summary judgment, the plaintiff must show the law was clearly established when the alleged violation occurred and must come forward with … sufficient facts to show the official violated that clearly established law.
Cited 93 timesPublishedPhyllis J. May v. City of Nahunta, Georgia
846 F.3d 1320 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 19, 2017
In evaluating a government actor’s entitlement to qualified immunity, the Supreme Court has developed an objective-reasonableness test wherein “the official’s actions must be evaluated against ‘clearly established law,’ … Second, we determine whether that right was clearly established at the time of alleged conduct. Id.
Cited 26 timesPublished621 F.3d 1069 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 9, 2010
Qualified Immunity—The City’s Employees [1] “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects govern- ment officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Nevertheless, we conclude that these defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because Delia has not established that this constitu- tional right was clearly established at the time of Chief Wells’s order to Delia.
Reversed on other grounds by Filarsky v. Delia, 132 S. Ct. 1657 (2012)Cited 29 timesPublished846 F.3d 289 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 19, 2017
A state official is immune from liability unless he or she “violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable official would have known.” Carpenter v. … When determining whether a public official is entitled to qualified immunity, we examine (1) whether the official violated the plaintiff’s constitutional or statutory right, and (2) whether that right was clearly established
Cited 65 timesPublished734 F.3d 1237 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 8, 2013
True, qualified immunity is strong stuff: the defense shields public officials from suit as long as their conduct didn’t infringe any legal rights clearly established at the time. See Camretta v. Greene, 131 S. … Conduct that violates the clearly established rights of convicts necessarily violates the clearly established rights of pretrial detainees.
Cited 120 timesPublished
Ask Donna