Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersF

10,000+ results

0.83s

  • Julie Peffer v. Mike Stephens

    880 F.3d 256 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 17, 2018

    That is because we are convinced that there was no clearly established constitutional violation and therefore qualified immunity applies. … Because there was no constitutional violation, we need not address the second step of the qualified-immunity analysis, whether the law was clearly established.

    Cited 145 timesPublished
  • Demoret v. Zegarelli

    451 F.3d 140 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 8, 2006

    I Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability when performing discretionary duties “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … clearly established law.

    Overruled on other grounds by Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53 (2006)Cited 113 timesPublished
  • Hynson v. City of Chester, Legal Department

    864 F.2d 1026 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 23, 1988

    This is the essence of the constitutional right which the plaintiffs must show was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation in order to negate the police officers' qualified immunity. B. … know, we first addressed the nature of the right claimed before determining whether it was clearly established at the time of the conduct. 26 The reference to clearly established rights in Harlow and Stoneking means more

    Cited 81 timesPublished
  • Fuhr v. City of Seattle

    Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 7, 2026

    CITY OF SEATTLE 3 established law that sets out a constitutional violation. Because no case clearly established a Fourth Amendment right violated by Zech, he was entitled to qualified immunity. … Because no case clearly established a Fourth Amendment right violated by Zech, he is entitled to qualified immunity. II. Other Claims Fuhr’s other claims also fail.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Tiscareno v. Anderson

    639 F.3d 1016 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 14, 2011

    Because such an obligation was not clearly established, we conclude that Anderson was entitled to qualified immunity. … Anderson is entitled to qualified immunity because he acted reasonably in light of clearly established law.

    Vacated in part, on other grounds by Tiscareno v. Anderson, 421 F. App'x 842 (2011)Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Lamonte Jackson-Gibson v. Reginald Beasley

    118 F.4th 848 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 15, 2024

    Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages under § 1983 “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … a constitutional right; and (2) the right was clearly established.”

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Nelson O. Robles v. Prince George's County, Maryland James Rozar Antonio Debarros, Nelson O. Robles v. Prince George's County, Maryland James Rozar Antonio Debarros

    308 F.3d 437 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Oct 29, 2002

    ("Even though the officers' actions deprived Robles of an actual constitutional right, Rozar and DeBarros may still be entitled to qualified immunity if that right was not clearly established at the time of the incident." … Rather, it appears that the panel actually granted qualified immunity either on the wholly illegitimate ground that the officers did not subjectively understand that their conduct violated clearly established law, or on the

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Copelin-Brown v. New Mexico State Personnel Office

    399 F.3d 1248 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 1, 2005

    Qualified Immunity We review de novo a district court’s ruling on qualified immunity. Farmer v. Perrill, 288 F.3d 1254, 1259 (10th Cir. 2002). … At the same time, the Court has stated that “[i]f the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct.”

    Cited 53 timesPublished
  • Kerman v. City of New York

    261 F.3d 229 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 26, 2001

    Qualified immunity will attach to an officer’s decision to enter a dwelling in response to perceived exigent circumstances so long as the “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Notwithstanding these earlier indications of the law’s likely evolution, we cannot say that for qualified immunity purposes the current law governing the war-rantless entry in this case was clearly established by October

    Cited 185 timesPublished
  • DeMayo v. Nugent

    517 F.3d 11 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 22, 2008

    grounds of qualified immunity. … Law enforcement officers may not violate constitutional rights, then expect qualified immunity when a court refuses to craft an unprecedented exception to a clearly established rule of law.

    Cited 50 timesPublished
  • Gunasekera v. Irwin

    551 F.3d 461 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 8, 2009

    established to defeat the defendants’ qualified immunity defense must wait until a factual record has been developed. … established for purposes of qualified immunity before a factual record had been developed.

    Cited 1,300 timesPublished
  • Estevis v. Cantu

    134 F.4th 793 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 16, 2025

    We reverse and render judgment granting the officers qualified immunity for all shots fired. … In any event, Estevis bore the burden to negate qualified immunity by showing shots 4–9 violated clearly established law. See King v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Mosher Ex Rel. Estate of Mosher v. Nelson

    589 F.3d 488 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Dec 17, 2009

    was 'clearly established' at the time of the defendant’s alleged violation." … Therefore, Dennehy is entitled to qualified immunity. B.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • McMorrow v. Little

    109 F.3d 432 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 17, 1997

    On appeal the officials argue that the law was not clearly established, that they are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim, and that MeMorrow’s claim must be dismissed. … Again we conclude that the officials are entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that this conduct was unconstitutional.

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Allan F. Archer, Jr. v. Gilbert Sanchez

    933 F.2d 1526 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 1, 1991

    Anderson then guides our inquiry into whether qualified immunity shields Mr. … While the court must decide whether the law in question was clearly established, Meade v.

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Jackson v. Long

    102 F.3d 722 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 17, 1996

    issue whether the federal right allegedly infringed was `clearly established.'" … This contention raises the legal questions of whether Sheriff Long violated any clearly established constitutional rights of plaintiffs in responding to the inmate's complaint against them and, if the law clearly established

    Cited 50 timesPublished
  • James Meyer v. Lana J. Robinson, Individually and as a Police Officer of the City of Lawrence

    992 F.2d 734 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 6, 1993

    The court adopted the following rule: “The question determining the existence of qualified immunity is whether a reasonable person could have believed the defendants’ actions to be lawful in light of clearly established law … Under the Harlow standard, qualified immunity should be granted when the official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • Vincson Herren and Woody Eugene Herren v. E.J. Bowyer, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Lee County, Georgia

    850 F.2d 1543 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 3, 1988

    Public officials performing discretionary functions 5 enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … a grant of summary judgment based upon qualified immunity.” 841 F.2d at 1565 ; accord Webb v.

    Cited 32 timesPublished
  • Madonna Sterling, of the Estate of Marcus Anthony Wayman v. Borough of Minersville F. Scott Wilinsky, Police Officer Thomas Hoban, Police Officer Joseph Wilinsky, Police Chief, Individually and as Police Officers for the Borough of Minersville Officer F. Scott Wilinsky and Officer Thomas Hoban

    232 F.3d 190 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 14, 2000

    The court further ruled that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity since their conduct violated Wayman's clearly established right to privacy as protected by the Constitution. 7 Officers Hoban and Wilinsky … II. 8 We have previously set forth the analytical framework for deciding qualified immunity claims. First, we must determine if the plaintiff has alleged a deprivation of a clearly established constitutional right.

    Cited 42 timesPublished
  • Castillo v. City of Weslaco

    388 F.3d 464 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 13, 2004

    Finding that the Officers sufficiently alleged a violation of clearly established federal law, the district court denied the Appellants’ motion for summary judgment asserting qualified immunity and scheduled the case for … II Qualified immunity is appropriate if “the defendant’s actions were ‘objectively reasonable’ with reference to ‘clearly established law’ at the time of the conduct in question.” Petta v.

    Cited 2 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.