Case law

Taylor Ex Rel. Estate of Mason v. Adams

221 F.3d 1254 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 11, 2000

her qualified immunity. … See, e.g., Layne, 119 S.Ct. at 1695 (holding defendants entitled to qualified immunity despite their unconstitutional conduct because of the lack of clearly established, preexisting law governing that conduct).

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

Pearson v. Shriners Hospitals

133 F.4th 433 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 2, 2025

immunity because the Former Employees have failed to cite a clearly established right. … Nonetheless, the Commissioner is entitled to qualified immunity because the Former Employees’ claims against her are not based on clearly established law. See Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009).

Frank Zavaro v. Thomas A. Coughlin, Iii, C.R. Homrighouse

970 F.2d 1148 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 31, 1992

We have previously articulated the standard for establishing a defense of qualified immunity. … Coughlin, 774 F.Supp. 189, 199-200 (S.D.N.Y.1991) (holding that a hearing officer is not entitled to qualified immunity for *1154 violating inmate’s clearly established right to an independent assessment of informants’ reliability

Losch v. Borough Of Parkesburg

736 F.2d 903 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 14, 1984

Kleindienst, 729 F.2d 267, 273 (3d Cir.1984). 26 Qualified immunity protects a defendant who failed to observe a right or a legal standard that was not clearly established when the defendant acted. … On the other hand, as the Harlow Court concluded, "[i]f the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail," unless the defendant "claims extraordinary circumstances and can prove that he neither

Lawrence v. United States

340 F.3d 952 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 21, 2003

Qualified Immunity 8 A district court's decision to grant summary judgment on the grounds of qualified immunity is reviewed de novo. Case v. Kitsap County Sheriff's Dep't, 249 F.3d 921 , 925 (9th Cir.2001). … If the right is not clearly established, the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. Id.

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

Bernier v. Trump

299 F. Supp. 3d 150 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 8, 2018

The court held: Plaintiff's Bivens claims are easily dismissed on the second prong of the qualified immunity test because the rights Plaintiff claims were violated were not clearly established at the time the alleged violations … As noted above, this court dismissed Plaintiff's Bivens claim on the second "clearly established" prong of the qualified immunity test. See Pearson v.

Freeman v. Blair

862 F.2d 1330 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 30, 1989

See 793 F.2d at 171-73. 3 We turn to the issues of qualified immunity. … defendants are entitled to qualified immunity with respect to plaintiffs' claims concerning defendants' failure to obtain a search warrant, and that none of the defendants is entitled to qualified immunity with respect to

Susan Vaughn v. Greene County, AR

438 F.3d 845 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 17, 2006

Individual Liability of Sheriff Langston “Qualified immunity protects a government official from liability in a [section] 1983 claim unless his or her conduct violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional … right; and, if so, (2) whether the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation such that a reasonable official would understand his conduct was unlawful in the situation he confronted.

Burton v. Richmond

370 F.3d 723 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 2, 2004

Because we determine that there was no violation of a clearly established constitutional right, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … II. 5 Governmental officials are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 when performing discretionary functions unless they violate clearly established law in executing their duties. Burton I, 276 F.3d at 976 .

Beard v. Whitmore Lake School District

402 F.3d 598 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 4, 2005

denied the teachers’ request for qualified immunity. … Conclusion Because the searches in this case did not violate clearly established law, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. The denial of summary judgment is accordingly REVERSED.

Cox v. Roskelley

359 F.3d 1105 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 20, 2004

The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, without making any qualified immunity argument. … The second summary judgment motion asserted, for the first time, a qualified immunity defense.

Burke v. Town of Walpole

405 F.3d 66 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Apr 26, 2005

Shea, and Trooper McDonald should receive qualified immunity on the ground that their conduct was objectively reasonable under clearly established law. See Burke, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24897, at *25 (Det. … Bausch to be one of the officers who arrested Burke and reach his qualified immunity defense. 23 The other police defendants raise no argument about the absence of clearly established law.

James Cameron v. Richard Thornburgh, Attorney General

983 F.2d 253 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 22, 1993

the defendants therefore had qualified immunity from suit. … protected by qualified immunity.

Reed v. Kemper

673 F. App'x 533 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 12, 2016

In this court Reed contends that Kemper is not entitled to qualified immunity. He argues that Turner clearly establishes that the rationale articulated in Kemper’s affidavit is not related to peno-logical objectives. … Michelle Bones, however, is entitled to qualified immunity because she did not violate clearly established law. Complaint examiners follow the law so long as they do their job in examining complaints in good faith.

Scotto v. Almenas

143 F.3d 105 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 5, 1998

Most executive officials receive qualified immunity, whereby "government officials performing discretionary functions ... are shielded from liability ... insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Qualified Immunity 28 The district court did not consider, and the parties have not briefed, whether or not Almenas, as alleged by Scotto, violated clearly established constitutional norms of which an objectively reasonable

John Doe, as Next Friend of Jane Doe, a Child v. Hillsboro Independent School District, Larry Zabcik

81 F.3d 1395 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 17, 1996

the grounds for denying a motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity: “(a) a determination about pre-existing ‘clearly established’ law, or (b) a determination about ‘genuine’ issues of fact for trial.” 15 The … given facts showed a violation of clearly established law.

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

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.