Case law

Smith v. Gomez

550 F.3d 613 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 15, 2008

The trial court resolved all claims in favor of the governmental authority on various grounds, including their absolute immunity as well as their qualified immunity. … Upon review the undisputed evidence clearly establishes that Smith’s rights were not violated.

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.

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.

Hawatmeh v. City of Henderson

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 7, 2025

CITYOF HENDERSON 3 qualified immunity because Joseph’s right to be free of excessive force during an active hostage situation was not clearly established at the time of the violation. … “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officers from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which 12 HAWATMEH V.

Karl Huber v. Christopher Coulter

684 F. App'x 623 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 21, 2017

Ct. 3, 4 (2013) (police officer entitled to qualified immunity unless the conduct at issue violated a clearly established constitutional right). … The district court properly granted summary judgment on Huber’s excessive force claim because defendants’ limited use of force during the course of Huber’s arrest did not violate a clearly established right. See id.

Fred Watson v. Eddie Boyd, III

119 F.4th 539 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 21, 2024

We consider whether arguable probable cause exists as “part of the resolution of qualified immunity’s second prong, the clearly established prong.” Id. at 901; see also id. … The defendants nonetheless assert that “even if Officer Boyd’s actions did violate Watson’s constitutional rights, Officer Boyd is still entitled to qualified immunity because those claimed rights were not ‘clearly established

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

Barbera v. Smith

836 F.2d 96 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 30, 1987

Qualified Immunity 20 Prosecutors are entitled to qualified immunity from suit if "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … Yet, unless it was clearly established in 1981-82 that the government owed a duty of protection to someone in Barbera's position, qualified immunity will insulate Schlessinger's actions. 22 The Supreme Court held in Estelle

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

Anderson v. Burke County

239 F.3d 1216 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 24, 2001

The district court denied the individual Defendants qualified immunity on Plaintiffs freedom of speech claim but granted the individual Defendants qualified immunity on Plaintiffs freedom of association claim. … was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

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.

Guillemard-Ginorio v. Contreras-Gomez

490 F.3d 31 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jun 12, 2007

Had Defendants raised a qualified immunity defense to the First Amendment claims before the magistrate judge, they would have been entitled to the district court's "clearly erroneous or contrary … -19- position would have known that [the plaintiff] had a clearly established Fourth Amendment right not to identify himself").

Randy Cole v. Michael Hunter

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 29, 2015

Clearly established law Under the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, we ask whether it was clearly established in October 2010 that using deadly force against a person in circumstances like those here … established law, and Officer Carson is entitled to qualified immunity.

Eversole v. Steele

59 F.3d 710 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 14, 1995

However, “[t]he defense of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Qualified immunity will shield a police officer from § 1983 liability if “ ‘a reasonable officer could have believed [the plaintiffs arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the [arresting

Malcolm Sheppard v. Visitors of VSU

993 F.3d 230 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 2, 2021

To determine whether qualified immunity shields Debose, we must consider whether (1) the facts “make out a violation of a constitutional right” and (2) whether that right was “clearly established” at the time of the defendant … As to his due process claim, Debose is entitled to qualified immunity because there is no clearly established right to continued enrollment in higher education.

Lytle v. Wondrash

182 F.3d 1083 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 7, 1999

established' to preclude qualified immunity under Harlow and its progeny." … Accordingly, the constitutional right Lytle asserts was not clearly established at the time the Appellants allegedly retaliated against her, and as a result they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Moore v. City of Desloge, Mo.

647 F.3d 841 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 28, 2011

The qualified immunity doctrine provides “that government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … In analyzing a claim of qualified immunity, we may examine the two key prongs—whether a right was violated and whether the asserted right was clearly established—in either order. See Camreta v.