Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.57s
Christina Romero v. Amanda Brown
937 F.3d 514 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 29, 2019
The court held that a violation of the right to family integrity was not clearly established in the context of a social worker investigation, entitling both Brown and Mouton to qualified immunity. … Those allegations do not establish that the officers violated clearly established law.
Cited 26 timesPublished131 F.4th 677 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 10, 2025
The Administrators were not entitled to qualified immunity because it was clearly established at the time that a professor has a right to * This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. … Because “it is not possible to determine at this stage as a matter of law that [Jensen] has not alleged a violation of clearly established law,” the Administrators are not entitled to qualified immunity at the pleading stage
Cited 31 timesPublished65 F.3d 155 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 27, 1995
An official sued as an individual is entitled to qualified immunity, and therefore summary judgment, if his conduct "does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Qualified immunity shields Mills against a claim of arrest without probable cause if a "reasonable officer could have believed [the arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the [arresting
Cited 114 timesPublishedJoseph D. Leeks v. Lowell K. Cunningham, Mr. Carson P. Bass Joseph A. Kemper M. Press
997 F.2d 1330 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 18, 1993
The Tenth Circuit affirmed the-denial of qualified immunity, finding that as of 1980 it was “unequivocal” that the law as to the forced medication of a pretrial detainee was clearly established. Id. at 688 . … Thus, in assessing appellant’s qualified immunity claim, our concern is whether statutory or case law existed in July 1989 to clearly establish that a county jail pretrial detainee had a right under the Due Process Clause
Cited 28 timesPublished577 F.3d 60 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 11, 2009
We hold that all requested relief, other than damages, is moot and that appellee is entitled to qualified immunity from damages because there was no clearly established right under the First Amendment to receive campaign … We also hold that appellee Richard Blumenthal is entitled to qualified immunity from Dean’s claim for damages because there was no clearly established right under the First Amendment to receive campaign contributions during
Cited 63 timesPublished103 F.4th 363 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 30, 2024
The doctrine of qualified immunity “shields public officials sued in their individual capacities ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … As noted above, once an official asserts the defense of qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show that “(1) the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time
Cited 5 timesPublishedSkatemore, Inc. v. Gretchen Whitmer
40 F.4th 727 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 19, 2022
The doctrine of 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 … Assuming Plaintiffs alleged an unconstitutional taking, they have failed to show that the alleged constitutional violation was clearly established.5 The Supreme Court has cautioned courts “not to define clearly established
Cited 69 timesPublishedPatrick Stockdale v. Kim Helper
979 F.3d 498 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 30, 2020
But because her conduct did not violate any clearly established law, qualified immunity protects her. We affirm in part and reverse in part. I. … Qualified Immunity. That leaves Helper’s qualified immunity defense against Stockdale and Dunning’s § 1983 claim.
Cited 23 timesPublishedTonkovich v. Kansas Board of Regents
159 F.3d 504 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 26, 1998
II, doc. 7 at 679 (Dean Jerry entitled to qualified immunity because his actions did not violate clearly established constitutional rights); see also id. vol. … Pages and pages of facts are no substitute for citations to clearly established law. Nor can they meet Professor Tonkovich’s burden on qualified immunity.
Cited 22 timesPublished906 F.3d 150 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Oct 11, 2018
officials who act incompetently or in disregard of clearly established legal principles. … Qualified immunity inoculates government officials from civil liability based on their discretionary actions and decisions which, although injurious, "do[] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights
Cited 40 timesPublished421 F.3d 185 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 30, 2005
Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity shields public officials performing discretionary functions from § 1983 and Fourteenth Amendment liability ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … Our qualified immunity inquiry is a two step process. First, we must determine whether the defendants violated “clearly established” rights. Id.
Cited 330 timesPublishedUnited States v. Albert Tantalo
680 F.2d 903 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 3, 1982
Defense counsel urged that since the appellant had provided immunized testimony before the grand jury, the Government was called upon to present evidence to the court to establish not only an independent basis for the indictment … The district court’s ruling which upheld the indictments, without calling upon the government to establish that the evidence it proposed to present at the trial was untainted by the appellant’s immunized testimony, was in
Disagreed with in part by United States v. Adrian Pielago, Maria Varona, 135 F.3d 703 (1998)Cited 52 timesPublishedSamuel Campbell v. City of Springboro, Ohio
700 F.3d 779 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 29, 2012
Qualified immunity “shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Clearly Established Right For a right to be “clearly established,” “[t]he contours of that right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.”
Cited 130 timesPublished793 F.2d 166 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 4, 1986
The decisions to inspect without a warrant clearly were functions for which Blair and Massa are not entitled to absolute immunity nor, as we conclude below, were the decisions reasonable under clearly established law. … Our task then will be to determine whether the law in the areas implicated in those claims was clearly established at the time of the actions here at issue and thus whether the state officials’ qualified immunity defenses
Vacated on other grounds by Madewell v. Roberts, 909 F.2d 1203 (1990)Cited 24 timesPublished601 F.3d 1152 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 30, 2010
that the deputies violated her clearly established civil rights. … immunity because Townsend had presented evidence that the deputies violated her clearly established rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Cited 162 timesPublishedMark Cook v. Roberta Sheldon and Nelson Saldana, New York State Troopers
41 F.3d 73 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 2, 1994
We conclude that the Troopers have not yet earned qualified immunity as a matter of law because, under the facts alleged by Cook, the Troopers may be held to have violated Cook’s clearly established rights. … To evaluate the Troopers’ right to qualified immunity, we must again examine whether the malicious prosecution claim alleges a violation of Cook’s clearly established federal rights.
Cited 351 timesPublished966 F.2d 480 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 5, 1992
Thus, as we stated in Romero , [t]he qualified immunity test necessitates three inquiries: (1) the identification of the specific right allegedly violated; (2) the determination of whether that right was so ‘clearly established … Did DeNieva Identify a Specific Right, and Was it Clearly Established? 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 41 timesPublished724 F.2d 1083 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 11, 1984
By eliminating the subjective component of the qualified immunity claim, the Supreme Court clearly intended to facilitate disposition of claims of qualified immunity on summary judgment motions, but one must read much into … A public official, clothed with qualified immunity, is not required to anticipate future development of constitutional doctrine, but he is required to respect the established constitutional rights of others.
Abrogated by Roger D. Young v. Grady B. Lynch Sgt. Benthall H.R. Daughtry Officer Newell G.T. Cousins John Doe, Correctional Officer, (Two Cases), 846 F.2d 960 (1988)Cited 54 timesPublished819 F.3d 625 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 11, 2016
Without evidence regarding the grounds for Patterson’s decision, we are unable to determine whether his actions were contrary to,.clearly established law. … Given that Patterson, upon his motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity, has faded to show facts that would entitle him to qualified immunity, we would ordinarily simply reverse the grant of qualified immunity and
Cited 79 timesPublished567 F.3d 54 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 22, 2009
As a result, it would be premature to determine whether Defendants Bates and Hazzard are responsible for violating clearly established constitutional law or are immune from suit under the qualified immunity doctrine. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory
Cited 49 timesPublished
Ask Donna