Case law

Roska v. Sneddon

437 F.3d 964 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 9, 2006

To overcome a qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must first establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right and then show that the right was clearly established. Garramone v. … Usually, if the law is clearly established at the time of defendant’s conduct, a qualified immunity defense will fail. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818-19 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982).

Wagner v. City of Holyoke

404 F.3d 504 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Apr 13, 2005

Such immunity can be overcome only if the constitutional right at issue is clearly established and a reasonable official would have known that his actions violated that right. See Harlow v. … But qualified immunity requires that the general right be placed in a reasonably specific context; and given the facts surrounding Wagner's discipline, this is not a case in which reasonable officers, in light of clearly

Vaughn v. United States Small Business Administration

65 F.3d 1322 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 21, 1995

Because we conclude that Whitmore did not violate any of Vaughn’s clearly established rights, we REVERSE the district court’s refusal to grant Whitmore qualified immunity. I. … Under Harlow, an exercise of such discretion only loses the protection of qualified immunity when a clearly established right has been violated.

Jarovits v. Monroe County Children & Youth Services

345 F. App'x 784 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 21, 2009

The Bayer Court held that “under the ‘clearly established’ prong of the Saucier test, defendants should be afforded qualified immunity with respect to [the plaintiffs’ procedural due process] claim.” … qualified immunity.

Weldeyohannes v. State of Washington

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 19, 2025

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages unless their conduct objectively violates clearly established rights. Harlow v. … impact whether the “unlawfulness . . . was clearly established at the time,” we reverse and remand the determinations of qualified immunity. 6 Id.

Patricia Scott v. Clay County, Tennessee Chinn Anderson Billy Pierce Michael Thompson

205 F.3d 867 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 1, 2000

as their conduct does not violate clearly established [federal] statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … The procedure for evaluating claims of qualified immunity is tripartite: First, we determine whether a constitutional violation has occurred; second, we determine whether the right that was violated was a clearly established

Anthony Martin v. Susan Duffy

858 F.3d 239 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 1, 2017

And we further conclude that Duffy is not entitled to qualified immunity from Martin’s retaliation claim because, under this Court’s precedent, it was clearly established at the time Duffy placed Martin in segregation that … to qualified immunity.

Higgins v. Penobscot County Sheriff's Department

446 F.3d 11 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Apr 14, 2006

immunity from the claims because they had not violated Higgins’ “clearly established” rights. … violated [the previously identified] clearly established right”); see also Riverdale Mills, 392 F.3d at 61 (“It is not always evident at the time an official takes an action that a clearly established right is involved.

Karen B. Masters v. Bobby G. Crouch

872 F.2d 1248 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 14, 1989

The defendants’ qualified immunity defense was based on their contention that at the time of the events complained of there was no “clearly established law” holding any of the defendants’ acts unconstitutional. … Thus, the district court denied the defendants’ claims of qualified immunity. III. A. In Harlow v.

Berube v. Conley

506 F.3d 79 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Oct 31, 2007

Qualified Immunity This circuit applies a three-part test for qualified immunity. … Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity unless “(1) the facts alleged show the defendants’ conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) the contours of this right are ‘clearly established’ under then-existing

Robinson v. Nolte

77 F. App'x 413 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 2, 2003

Even though Officer Nolte violated the defendant’s constitutional rights, he may still be protected by qualified immunity unless the constitutional rule was “clearly established” at the time of the violation. Saucier v. … We therefore reject his contention that he is shielded by qualified immunity. The decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Spuler v. Pickar

958 F.2d 103 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 15, 1992

Notwithstanding, court challenges associated with denial of tenure persist; and the affirmative qualified immunity defense rests on whether public officials have violated a clearly-established right. … The defendants did not violate any clearly established constitutional rights and were thus entitled to qualified immunity.

Melodi Navab-Safavi v. Broadcasting Board of Govenors

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 1, 2011

Legal Background Appellant’s motion for dismissal is rooted in the well- established doctrine of qualified immunity. … The Board asserts its qualified immunity, but we are unable to determine without an evidentiary record whether any act it committed in defense of those functions constituted a violation of clearly established rights, or even

L. Patrick Gray, III v. Griffin Bell

712 F.2d 490 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 21, 1983

The second, qualified immunity, 8 is in the nature of an affirmative defense and protects an official from liability only if he can show that his actions did not contravene clearly established statutory or constitutional … Fitzgerald, 102 S.Ct. at 2738 (qualified immunity is available to “government officials performing discretionary functions ... insofar as their conduct” does not violate clearly established law).

Nancy Wever v. James Carman

388 F.3d 601 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 4, 2004

The district court denied the motion, holding that the complaint stated a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and that Carmen had not established he was due qualified immunity. … As a pretrial detainee, Wever had a clearly established Fourteenth Amendment right to be protected from the known risks of suicide.5 Yellow Horse v.

Hydrick v. Hunter

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 28, 2006

Defendants’ Qualified Immunity Defense Defendants also argued that the district court erred when it denied them qualified immunity. … Thus, there are two bodies of law from which we might draw “clearly established” law for qualified immunity purposes: first, where the SVPs claim a violation of a right that is clearly established even in the prison context

Victor Couzens v. City of Forest Park, Ohio

114 F.4th 571 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 27, 2024

established, so qualified immunity insulates the officers from liability. … So, even assuming that Couzens established constitutional violations here, those violations were not clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity. 8 Because Couzens sued Arns in his official

Mario Garcia v. County of Riverside

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 8, 2016

Amendment were clearly established. … Qualified immunity applies unless the facts alleged make out (1) a violation of a constitutional right, which (2) was “clearly established” at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct. Pearson v.

Robert Ward v. City of Sherwood, Arkansas

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 28, 2026

Qualified immunity shields a government official from suit under § 1983 if his “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … We doubt it is clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity that Ward’s use of profanity in the presence of children, after a warning to desist, is protected speech. See Prose v. Wendover, 96 F.

Walker v. Prince George's County, Md.

575 F.3d 426 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 30, 2009

A 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 would … Consequently, she is entitled to qualified immunity. 8 WALKER v.