Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.97s
Haley Olson v. County of Grant
127 F.4th 1193 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 10, 2025
immunity because any constitutional violation was not clearly established. … Though Carpenter violated Olson’s Fourth Amendment rights, the law was not clearly established at the time, thus entitling Carpenter to qualified immunity. A.
Cited 6 timesPublishedAlan D. Whatley v. Robert E. Philo
817 F.2d 19 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 18, 1987
GEE, Circuit Judge: This § 1988 case presents the question whether the plaintiff has vitiated the defendants’ qualified immunity defense. … The defendants asserted their qualified immunity defense. The district court dismissed on summary judgment, 1 on the basis that Whatley had failed to overcome the immunity defense.
Cited 51 timesPublished476 F.3d 397 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 7, 2007
by the plaintiff constitute a violation of clearly established law.”). … To defeat qualified immunity, the plaintiff *404 must show that the defendant had notice that the manner in which the force was used had been previously proscribed: [T]here is no doubt that [precedent] clearly establishes
Cited 236 timesPublishedDominique Ramsey v. David Rivard
110 F.4th 860 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 1, 2024
Rivard argues that qualified immunity bars the plaintiffs’ unduly suggestive identification claim because they cannot show that Rivard’s actions violated their clearly established rights. (Appellant Br. 49.) … First, Rivard gains no immunity for violations of clearly established law by following the prosecutor’s advice. See Burns v. Reed, 500 U.S. 478, 495 (1991).
Cited 18 timesPublished644 F.3d 297 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 17, 2011
B The doctrine of qualified immunity protects public officials from liability for civil, damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … ; and (2) whether the right at issue was “clearly established” at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct. 3 Id. at 815-16 (citing Saucier v.
Cited 47 timesPublished163 F.3d 119 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 11, 1998
. § 1983 ; it did so on the ground that the officials had qualified immunity. 1 We disagree with the court’s conclusion that Greenwood’s property right in his clinical staff privileges was not *121 clearly established and … “Even defendants who violate [clearly established] constitutional rights enjoy a qualified immunity that protects them from liability for damages unless it is further demonstrated that their conduct was unreasonable under
Cited 24 timesPublishedJonathan Turmon v. Charles Jordan, Individually, and Red Roof Inns, Incorporated
405 F.3d 202 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 25, 2005
The doctrine of qualified immunity shields law enforcement officers performing discretionary duties “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Because Jordan violated Turmoris Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable seizures and because that right was clearly established on March 10, 2001, Jordan is not entitled to qualified immunity on the illegal seizure
Cited 39 timesPublished966 F.2d 480 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 5, 1992
by qualified immunity. … Did DeNieva Identify a Specific Right, and Was it Clearly Established? 21 We can consider the first two prongs of the Romero test together, as both raise the question of Reyes' violation of a clearly established right.
Cited 20 timesPublishedSaleem Bashir v. Rockdale County, Georgia
445 F.3d 1323 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 14, 2006
Thus, Bashir has satisfied the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis by demonstrating that his warrantless arrest was unlawful. 2. Clearly Established Law. … The next question we address in the qualified immunity analysis is whether the constitutional right was “clearly established” at the time of the violation.
Abrogated on other grounds by Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009)Cited 188 timesPublishedGeorge Mitchell v. State of Washington
818 F.3d 436 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 14, 2016
Qualified Immunity — Clearly Established Despite the fact that we hold that the violation of a constitutional right occurred, Dr. … Bell is entitled to qualified immunity if it was not “clearly established” that his actions would violate Mitchell’s constitutional rights. 7 Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232 , 129 S.Ct. 808 . At the time of Dr.
Cited 210 timesPublishedCindy Laine Franklin v. Chris Curry
738 F.3d 1246 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 23, 2013
DISCUSSION Qualified immunity shields government officials acting within their discretionary authority from liability unless the officials “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Thus, to evaluate their entitlement to qualified immunity, we ask whether Franklin has alleged a violation of a constitutional right and, if so, whether the constitutional right violated was clearly established at the
Cited 195 timesPublished70 F.3d 1095 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 30, 1995
were not in dispute. 10 Once a law enforcement officer asserts qualified immunity, "the district court must determine whether, in light of clearly established principles governing the conduct in question, the officer objectively … that the law was clearly established, Doody was nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity because "a reasonable dam safety engineering official, similarly situated, could have believed breaching the dam was lawful."
Cited 3 timesPublishedJenkins v. Talladega City Board of Education
95 F.3d 1036 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 23, 1996
the Anderson Court’s clarification of the appropriate level of generality at which a right must be “clearly established” for purposes of qualified immunity. … Justice was decided a few days after the events at issue here and, therefore, does not clearly establish the law in this case for qualified immunity purposes.
Vacated by Jenkins v. Talladega City Board Of Education, 115 F.3d 821 (1997)Cited 8 timesPublishedAndrade v. Board of County Commissioners
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 3, 2021
Where, as here, the defendants have asserted a qualified-immunity defense, the plaintiffs must show “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at … to qualified immunity.”
Cited 0 timesUnpublished119 F.3d 1129 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 8, 1997
immunity even by violating clearly established state law, id. at 194 , 104 S.Ct. at 3019 . … that federal qualified immunity is lost if an official violates clearly established state law.
Cited 4 timesPublished405 F.3d 652 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 2, 2005
The trial court also denied the Appellants qualified immunity. 3 On appeal, the Appellants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because the decision to demote Powell was reasonable in light of clearly established … Rainey is therefore entitled to qualified immunity, because doing nothing wrong is not a violation of clearly established law.
Cited 4 timesPublished704 F.2d 246 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 25, 1983
Most recently the Supreme Court refined the limits of qualified, good faith immunity, placing “[r]eliance on the objective reasonableness of an official’s conduct, as measured by reference to clearly established law.” … Under this approach summary judgment should issue on the grounds of qualified, good faith immunity if the official’s conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights at the time the challenged
Cited 110 timesPublished851 F.2d 615 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 21, 1988
Since Granata’s remedy of dismissal for properly established qualified immunity remains open, mandamus is not available. I. … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.
Disagreed with in part by Hallock v. Bonner, 387 F.3d 147 (2004)Cited 34 timesPublishedEspanola Way Corp. v. Murray Meyerson
690 F.2d 827 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 1, 1982
Further, the defense of qualified immunity is unavailable to officials who, though otherwise covered, act with malice 1 or contrary to clearly established law. Procunier v. … Fifth, a conscious attempt to deprive property owners of property without due process of law clearly contravenes established law.
Cited 98 timesPublished473 F.3d 731 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 10, 2007
If the right was clearly established, the government actor is not entitled to qualified immunity. … If the right was not clearly established, the officers are still entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 80 timesPublished
Ask Donna