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.

Flores v. JC Penney Corp.

256 F. App'x 979 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 28, 2007

Although a party may generally appeal from a district court’s determination regarding qualified immunity, the United States Supreme Court has held that “a defendant, entitled to invoke a qualified immunity defense[ ] may … Saucier, 533 U.S. at 202, 121 S.Ct. 2151 (describing the second prong of the two-prong qualified immunity inquiry to determine whether the constitutional right was “clearly established”).

Jamey Wilkins v. Lieutenant Upton

639 F. App'x 941 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Mar 2, 2016

“We review de novo the denial of a motion for summary judgment asserting qualified immunity.” Id. at 345. … Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense to liability under § 1983 and shields government officials from liability for civil damages as long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

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

Ginger Headley v. Boshko Ognenovski

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 10, 2026

“Prisoners have a clearly established constitutional right to be protected from the known risks of suicide and to have their serious medical needs attended to . . . . … However, “qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

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).

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

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.

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

Baptiste v. Penney Company, Inc.

147 F.3d 1252 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 30, 1998

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY 6 Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from individual liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless their conduct violates "clearly established statutory or constitutional … Unless the plaintiff demonstrates both that the defendant's conduct violated a federal right and the right was clearly established, the defendant must be granted qualified immunity.

Jacobs v. Village of Ottawa Hills

5 F. App'x 390 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 26, 2001

We only have jurisdiction to determine whether the facts, taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, show a violation of clearly established law sufficient to bar a finding of qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established legal rights of which a reasonable

Rehberg v. Paulk

611 F.3d 828 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 16, 2010

Because the federal law was not clearly established, the district court erred in denying qualified immunity to Paulk on Rehberg’s email subpoena claim.17 IV. … immunity because Rehberg’s right to be free from a retaliatory investigation is not clearly established.

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.

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").

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.

Mckenna v. City Of Royal Oak

469 F.3d 559 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 28, 2006

While the officers assert that they "raise only the legal issue of whether the facts set forth by [McKenna] constitute a violation of clearly established law," all three arguments advanced by the officers on the issue of … qualified immunity appeal.

Rogoz v. City of Hartford

796 F.3d 236 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 10, 2015

Op., 2013 WL 3816580, at *15 (emphases added), and that Watson was entitled to 15 qualified immunity because it was clearly established that such action was reasonable, see id., the 16 district court analogized to cases … 20 immunity on the basis that the law was not clearly established that such force would violate a suspect's 21 rights under the Fourth Amendment.

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.

Burella v. City of Philadelphia

501 F.3d 134 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 13, 2007

“Qualified immunity shields state officials from suit when their conduct ‘does- not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Yarris, 465 F.3d at 140 … If the' court concludes that the defendant’s *140 conduct violated a clearly established right, it must deny the defendant the protection afforded by qualified immunity. 9 Id. IV.