Case law

Timothy Cronin v. Chris Peterson

982 F.3d 1187 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 18, 2020

Analysis Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009)) (qualified immunity standard on summary judgment); see also Lane v. Nading, 927 F.3d 1018, 1022 (8th Cir. 2019) (qualified immunity standard on dismissal).

Harry Lee Jackson v. City of Beaumont Police Department, Don Gordon, Officer, and E.R. Pachall, Officer

958 F.2d 616 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 3, 1992

BARKSDALE, Circuit Judge: Asserting qualified immunity, police officers Don Gordon and E.R. … “Qualified immunity cloaks a police officer from liability if a reasonably competent law enforcement agent would not have known that his actions violated clearly established law.” James v.

Randy Karl Gometz v. Wilson E. Culwell

850 F.2d 461 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 5, 1988

The Supreme Court has said that qualified immunity is an immunity from suit, not merely a defense to liability. Mitchell, 472 U.S. at 526 , 105 S.Ct. at 2815 . … In Mitchell , the issue was whether the law allegedly violated was clearly established. Anderson, 823 F.2d at 237 .

Warren E. Buzek v. The County of Saunders, State of Nebraska Ron G. Poskochil, Individually and in His Official Capacity

972 F.2d 992 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 17, 1992

Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity when their “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Therefore, when Pickering’s fact-intensive balancing test is at issue, the asserted First Amendment right “can rarely be considered ‘clearly established’ for purposes of the Harlow qualified immunity standard.”

Ronald E. Stevens, Individually and as Guardian of the Person and Estate of Bradley Edwin Stevens, a Disabled Person v. Richard Umsted

131 F.3d 697 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 16, 1997

However, we also found that even though the state caseworker owed a duty to protect the1 child, the caseworker was entitled to qualified immunity because the duty was not clearly established at the time of the events. … “To determine whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, however, we must determine whether he violated a clearly established constitutional right at the time he took his action.” Hill v.

Purcell Ex Rel. Estate of Morgan v. Toombs County, GA

400 F.3d 1313 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 24, 2005

“Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from civil trials [] and from liability if their conduct violates no clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … , we need not address the element of preexisting clearly established law.

Kerman v. City of New York

374 F.3d 93 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 28, 2004

As a general rule, police officers 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 … Mayas in our analysis of Crossan’s qualified immunity defense, in reversing the district court’s ruling we necessarily rejected the proposition that Kerman’s rights in October 1995 *111 were not clearly established, for the

Valentin-De-Jesus v. United Healthcare

254 F.3d 358 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jun 27, 2001

United States, 45 F.3d 520, 522 (1st Cir. 1995) (sovereign immunity); BIW Deceived v. … Banco Santander, 902 F.2d 148, 152 (1st Cir. 1990) (explicating nature of "clearly erroneous" standard).

Rebirth Christian Academy Daycare, Inc. v. Brizzi

835 F.3d 742 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 30, 2016

We  conclude  that,  based  on  the  allegations  in  the  complaint,  the  defend‐ ants  were  not  entitled  to  qualified  immunity  because  they  violated  clearly  established  law:  the  complaint  adequately  alleges …  to qualified immunity. 

Jennifer Morgan-Tyra v. Andrei Nikolov

89 F.4th 1082 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 8, 2024

In a case involving a qualified-immunity defense, summary judgment is appropriate if: (1) the plaintiff-friendly version of the facts fails to establish a constitutional violation; or (2) the law at the time did not clearly … At most, his actions fall within the “hazy border between excessive and acceptable force,” which gives him the benefit of qualified immunity. Mullenix v.

Simpson v. Hines

903 F.2d 400 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 19, 1990

Qualified Immunity. 8 The doctrine of qualified immunity shields a police officer from liability for civil damages when a reasonable officer could have believed that the challenged conduct did not violate clearly established … The appealable issue is a legal one: whether the challenged conduct supports a claim of violation of a clearly established legal norm. Mitchell.

Doe v. Connecticut Department of Child & Youth Services

911 F.2d 868 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 13, 1990

Neither circumstance defeats the defense of qualified immunity on the facts of this case. … We agree with Judge Dorsey, for the reasons set forth in his opinion, that the undisputed facts establish the availability of the qualified immunity defense. The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Sarah Lee v. Ohio Educ. Ass'n

951 F.3d 386 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 24, 2020

Ultimately, the Wyatt Court held that private parties were not entitled to qualified immunity. Id. at 164–67. … Therefore, given that the question presented was limited to the applicability of qualified immunity, the Court declared that it could offer “no relief” to the private party defendants. Id.

Workman v. Jordan

32 F.3d 475 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 11, 1994

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY 13 Qualified immunity protects public officials from individual liability in a Sec. 1983 action unless the officials violated "clearly established ... constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … a clearly established federal right.

Marchello McCaster v. Mary Clausen

684 F.3d 740 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 12, 2012

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability when “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … To determine whether the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, we examine (1) whether the facts alleged or shown, construed in the light most favorable to McCaster, establish a violation of a constitutional right

Durkee v. Minor

841 F.3d 872 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 14, 2016

For now, suffice to say Defendants’ claim to qualified immunity imposes the burden on Plaintiff to show Defendants violated a constitutional right that was clearly established under the facts of this case at the time of … While the district court’s factual findings are sufficient at this stage to overcome Defendant Hochmuth’s qualified immunity defense, we cannot say the 2 To complete our qualified immunity analysis as to

Shipman v. Hamilton

520 F.3d 775 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 1, 2008

Qualified immunity shields governmental actors performing discretionary functions from suit “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … “If the right was clearly established, the officer is not entitled to qualified immunity.” Washington, 481 F.3d at 547 (emphasis in original).

Cynthia F. Gordon v. Sgt. David Frantsi

454 F.3d 858 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 21, 2006

A denial of summary judgment may be treated as a final order when based on qualified immunity, but only to decide whether a certain point of law is "clearly established." Sanders v. … Qualified immunity still protects officers accused of violating a right if the right is not clearly established.

Thomas Winslow v. Richard Smith

696 F.3d 716 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 15, 2012

Qualified Immunity At the heart of their appeal, Taylor, Winslow, Dean, and Gonzalez argue the district court erred in holding that Defendants did not violate clearly established Fourteenth Amendment due process rights … “Qualified immunity shields government officials from [personal] liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would

Kevin Caffey v. Dwight Duch

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 28, 1998

With respect to Caffey&s section 1983 claim, assuming Caffey identified a clearly established federal right, see, e.g., Harrison v. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818-19 (1982) (official not entitled to qualified immunity when a -2- reasonable official would have known that conduct violated plaintiff&s clearly