Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersF

10,000+ results

1.19s

  • Daniel Houlihan v. City of Chicago

    871 F.3d 540 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2017

    To thwart qualified immunity, the plaintiffs had to prove two things: “first, that the facts alleged describe a vi- olation of a protected right; and second, that this right was clearly established at the time of the defendant's … Cook County Sheriff’s Office—decided four years after the police department reassigned them—the Northern Dis- trict of Illinois granted qualified immunity after concluding that the law did not clearly establish that the security-special

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • The Presbyterian Church (u.s.a.) v. The United States of America

    870 F.2d 518 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 13, 1989

    IV QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The district court held below that the individual INS agents named as defen *527 dants are entitled to qualified immunity. We agree. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, federal officials are immune from liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

    Cited 174 timesPublished
  • Carter v. Rhode Island

    68 F.3d 9 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Oct 18, 1995

    had been "clearly established" long before 1990. … immunity from suit "if the right asserted by the plaintiff was `clearly established' at the time of its alleged violation . . .

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • James Harold Peterson Paula Peterson v. City of Plymouth Michael Ridgley David Lindman Mark Bevins

    60 F.3d 469 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 14, 1995

    If the officers did not have probable cause, a second inquiry is necessary to determine whether the officers are nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity. 6 The officers *474 are immune from liability if, in light of clearly … In light of this clearly established law, Officer Ridgley did not act in an objectively reasonable manner.

    Cited 117 timesPublished
  • Harhay v. Town of Ellington Board of Education

    323 F.3d 206 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 21, 2003

    Public officials enjoy qualified immunity from suit for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for acts undertaken in their official capacity, unless their conduct violates clearly established constitutional rights of which an objectively … Defendants may benefit from qualified immunity if plaintiff is unable to establish any of these three *212 steps.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Gene Bartholomew v. Commonwealth Of Pa

    221 F.3d 425 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 7, 2000

    established at the time those warrants were executed. 15 We note in this connection that, for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis, the "clearly established constitutional right" should be set forth with specificity … Thus, while it was "clearly established" that warrants must be particular, the narrower and more appropriate question, i.e. whether it was clearly established that one has a constitutional right to be free from a search pursuant

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Courtney Saunders v. Kyle Thies

    38 F.4th 701 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 29, 2022

    The district court resolved the officers’ entitlement to qualified immunity on the clearly established prong, concluding that it was not clearly established that the -12- failure … The district court thus resolved this claim on the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity analysis rather than the constitutional violation prong.

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Joseph Carl Brown v. Joseph Ponte

    842 F.2d 16 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Mar 14, 1988

    As a result, the qualified immunity defense is available to appellants. … If the law at the time of appellants’ actions was not “clearly established,” they could not have “known” that their conduct was forbidden. Id.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Dennis Wiertella v. Lake Cnty., Ohio

    141 F.4th 775 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 24, 2025

    Qualified immunity To overcome Snow’s and Watson’s qualified-immunity defense, the Estate must establish (1) that Snow and Watson violated Wiertella’s constitutional rights, and (2) that the governing caselaw “clearly … Sheehan, 575 U.S. 600, 613 (2015) (“Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.”).

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Morin v. Caire

    77 F.3d 116 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 7, 1996

    The Plaintiffs' Constitutional Claims: Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity from suit under § 1983 unless it is shown by specific allegations that the officials violated clearly established law.10 … To determine if qualified immunity applies, this court follows a two-step process.

    Cited 193 timesPublished
  • Murray-Ruhl v. Shiawassee

    246 F. App'x 338 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 29, 2007

    Katz’s two-pronged qualified immunity analysis asks whether the constitutional right at issue was clearly established. … Garner provides a “clearly established” right that fulfills the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis. Did Jenkins’s Conduct Violate a Constitutional Right?

    Cited 28 timesUnpublished
  • Hill v. Walsh

    884 F.3d 16 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 27, 2018

    Because the law on the emergency aid exception to the warrant requirement was not clearly established at the time of the incident, we uphold the district court's entry of judgment based on qualified immunity. … The district court also noted that even if the officers had violated the Fourth Amendment, they had a "strong case" that they were entitled to qualified immunity because "there is no clearly established Supreme

    Cited 46 timesPublished
  • Liffiton v. Keuker

    850 F.2d 73 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 21, 1988

    Even if they are not entitled to absolute immunity, they may be entitled to qualified immunity if their actions were objectively reasonable under clearly established law. Harlow v. … Such an action is neither clearly prosecutorial in nature, entitling him to absolute immunity, nor objectively reasonable under clearly established law, entitling him to qualified immunity. 24 Therefore, the complaint states

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • Edward Ray, Jr. v. E. Lara

    31 F.4th 692 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 11, 2022

    It has long been established that prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity from damages suits under § 1983 for activities that are “intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process.” Imbler v. … LARA that Ray does not qualify for the imminent danger exception to § 1915(g). 9 IV Because Ray has both accumulated three strikes and failed to establish a sufficient nexus between

    Cited 353 timesPublished
  • Batten v. Gomez

    324 F.3d 288 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 24, 2003

    suit under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … We have reviewed this claim and agree with the district court that Shuster and Gomez are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim because Shuster and Gomez violated no clearly established right held by Brittany.

    Cited 41 timesPublished
  • Kevin Holcomb v. Mark Lykens, Sean Smith, Joanne Pereria and John Gorczyk

    337 F.3d 217 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 23, 2003

    “In general, public officials are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe their acts did not … In order to defeat the defendants’ qualified immunity defense, then, Holcomb must allege a deprivation of an actual constitutional right clearly established at the time of the events in issue.

    Cited 174 timesPublished
  • Dudley v. Angel

    209 F.3d 460 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 25, 2000

    Therefore, Dudley must overcome the defendants’ claims of qualified immunity, by first showing a violation of clearly established federal rights. Sorenson v. … The first step of the qualified immunity analysis is subdivided into three questions: (1) whether a constitutional violation is alleged; (2) whether the law regarding the alleged violation was clearly established at the

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • H. John Putnam v. Diane Keller

    332 F.3d 541 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 18, 2003

    summary judgment motion premised on qualified immunity. … is clearly established.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Carvajal v. Dominguez

    542 F.3d 561 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 5, 2008

    An appeal of an order denying qualified immunity is a well-established application of this doctrine: “A district court’s denial of a claim of qualified immunity, to- the extent that it turns on an issue of law is an appealable … If not, the inquiry ends, and the officer has qualified immunity. If yes, then the second step is whether the violated right was clearly established.

    Cited 110 timesPublished
  • Bonnie Lee Hinchman v. Edwin L. Moore Jr. And Robert A. Dombrowski

    312 F.3d 198 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 2, 2002

    Immunity The defendants maintain, as alternative defenses, that they are entitled to both absolute and qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials performing discretionary functions will not incur liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

    Cited 117 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.