Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersF

10,000+ results

0.81s

  • Randall McElhaney v. Dustin Williams

    81 F.4th 550 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 25, 2023

    Because today’s appeal arises from the successful assertion of qualified immunity, we must modify our inquiry. Qualified immunity shields officials from trial “unless their actions violate clearly established rights.” … Accordingly, McElhaney has satisfied the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity inquiry.

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Darryl Williams v. Paul Delo Bill Hartley Raphael Coad Greg Dunn Unknown Wells, Officer Norma Lavrrar Paul Stuart, Officer

    49 F.3d 442 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 7, 1995

    “Generally, prison officials may rely on the defense of qualified immunity to protect them from liability for civil damages” if their conduct does not violate clearly established rights that would have been known to a reasonable … With respect to Williams’s claim for damages, the defendants in this case are entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity because they did not violate any clearly established Eighth Amendment right that

    Cited 199 timesPublished
  • Spiller v. Harris County

    113 F.4th 573 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 30, 2024

    However, unique to the qualified immunity context, “to overcome qualified immunity, the plaintiff’s version of those disputed facts must also constitute a violation of clearly established law.” Id. … Sergeant Lindsay is entitled to qualified immunity on Spiller’s excessive force claim.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Kirkland v. St. Vrain Valley School District No. Re-1J

    464 F.3d 1182 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 26, 2006

    After a defendant asserts a qualified immunity defense, the burden shifts to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff must first establish that the defendant’s actions violated a constitutional or statutory right … This is the process for the law’s elaboration from case to case, and it is one reason for our 5 If “the plaintiff successfully establishes the violation of a clearly established right, the burden shifts

    Cited 46 timesPublished
  • Von Derhaar v. Watson

    109 F.4th 817 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 30, 2024

    “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects 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 … “The second prong of the qualified- immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.” Id. at 656 (quoting Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 739 (2002)).

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Branch v. Tunnell

    937 F.2d 1382 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 27, 1991

    On October 3, 1988, Tunnell moved to dismiss Branch’s suit on grounds of qualified immunity, arguing that under the objective qualified immunity standard established by the Supreme Court in Harlow v. … Because a defendant's entitlement to qualified immunity in a Bivens or § 1983 action alleging judicial deception turns on the ability of the plaintiff to establish that the defendant knowingly or recklessly misled the magistrate

    Overruled on other grounds by Galbraith v. County of Santa Clara, 307 F.3d 1119 (2002)Cited 94 timesPublished
  • John D. Stough v. Walter J. Gallagher

    967 F.2d 1523 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 7, 1992

    Stough also contends that Sheriff Gallagher’s actions violated clearly established due process law. V.DISCUSSION A. Qualified Immunity and the First Amendment The Supreme Court held in Harlow v. … ’s actions, and (2) whether the public official’s conduct violated that clearly established law.

    Cited 56 timesPublished
  • Jacqueline Tuggle v. Tom Mangan, Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission

    348 F.3d 714 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 6, 2003

    In denying Man-gan’s qualified immunity defense, the district court stated the law was clearly established at the time Mangan acted that intentional sexual harassment by a person acting under color of state law violated the … Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity generally shields state actors from civil liability if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

    Cited 71 timesPublished
  • William Brinsdon v. McAllen Independent Sch Dist

    863 F.3d 338 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 30, 2017

    To establish that qualified immunity does not apply, Brinsdon must prove that Santos or Cavazos (1) “violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged … Second, the district court held that Santos and Cavazos were entitled to qualified immunity because how existing law applied to the facts was not clearly established.

    Cited 36 timesPublished
  • Grayson v. Ross

    454 F.3d 802 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 19, 2006

    If the answer is no, we grant qualified immunity. If the answer is yes, we go on to determine whether the right was clearly established. … Sharum is entitled to qualified immunity. 27 b.

    Cited 84 timesPublished
  • Atcherson v. Siebenmann

    605 F.2d 1058 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 13, 1979

    The Qualified Immunity Defense. … While we hold infra that Atcherson’s allegations of misconduct by her fellow probation officers qualify for constitutional protection, that conclusion was by no means “clearly established” at the time of the events in question

    Cited 29 timesPublished
  • Bibeau v. Pacific Northwest Research Foundation

    188 F.3d 1105 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 19, 1999

    Heller's assistant) contend that as government contractors that did not violate any clearly established constitutional rights, they are entitled to qualified immunity. … immunity and liability under section 1983. 7 Generally, the key question to be answered for purposes of qualified immunity is whether the law was clearly established at the time of the alleged acts.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • James King v. United States

    917 F.3d 409 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 25, 2019

    The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials "from liability for civil damages if their actions did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … If a jury were to credit Plaintiff's testimony, then neither Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity because any reasonable officer would have known, based on clearly established law, that applying force-tackling Plaintiff

    Reversed on other grounds by Brownback v. King, 592 U.S. 209 (2021)Cited 47 timesPublished
  • Tiffany King v. Charles Blackwood

    Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 2, 2026

    Officers Berry and Linster advance three more arguments for why the right was not clearly established. … There, an officer made supervisory rounds without looking inside the cells, and we held that he had not violated clearly established law “because there is no clearly established constitutional right to properly

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Troy Baker, and Glenn Snader, as Father and Next Friend of Jesse Snader v. City of Hamilton, Ohio, and Eric Taylor

    471 F.3d 601 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 18, 2006

    If the plaintiff establishes that a constitutional violation occurred, a court must next consider “whether the right was clearly established.” Id. … When a defendant raises a defense of qualified immunity, the plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that the defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity. Silberstein v.

    Cited 161 timesPublished
  • Burns v. PA Department of Corrections

    642 F.3d 163 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 20, 2011

    Qualified immunity shields government officials from suit even if their actions were unconstitutional as long as those officials‘ actions ―d[id] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … The burden of establishing qualified immunity falls to the official claiming it as a defense.

    Cited 224 timesPublished
  • Dalton v. Town of Silver City

    2 F.4th 1300 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 28, 2021

    Bascom’s clearly established right to equal protection of the law in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Officers moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … The Officers filed this interlocutory appeal from that denial of qualified immunity, alleging it was not clearly established that their conduct violated Ms.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Jody Lombardo v. City of St. Louis

    956 F.3d 1009 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 20, 2020

    Having concluded that the facts presented do not make out a violation of Gilbert’s constitutional rights, we need not evaluate the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity analysis. See Greenman v. … Jessen, 787 F.3d 882, 887 & n.10 (8th Cir. 2015) (affirming the district court’s grant of qualified immunity based on the constitutional violation prong even though the district court only reached the clearly established

    Reversed by Lombardo v. St. Louis, 594 U.S. 464 (2021)Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Justin Schimandle v. DeKalb County Sheriff's Office

    114 F.4th 648 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 28, 2024

    A Qualified immunity requires the court to determine: (1) whether the record evidences the violation of a federal statu- tory or constitutional right; and if so (2) whether the right violated was clearly established at … “There is no question that [Schimandle’s] constitutional right to be free from arrest without probable cause was clearly established at the time of the incident.”

    Cited 27 timesPublished
  • Terry Lee Passmore Swann v. Southern Health

    388 F.3d 834 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 21, 2004

    The parties agree that as a private entity, SHP is not entitled to assert a qualified immunity defense. … This is particularly true in cases involving qualified immunity, where we must determine whether a defendant’s actions violated a clearly established right. 132 F3d. at 1367 (emphasis added) (citations omitted

    Overruled on other grounds by Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009)Cited 70 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.