Case law

Rodis v. City and County Sf

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 9, 2009

demonstrated a violation of clearly established law.” … The arrest, therefore, was not clearly established as unlawful. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity.

Tolan v. Cotton

572 U.S. 650 · Supreme Court of the United States · May 5, 2014

Instead, it held that even if Cotton’s conduct did violate the Fourth Amend- ment, Cotton was entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate a clearly established right. Id., at 306. … Our qualified-immunity cases illustrate the importance of drawing inferences in favor of the nonmovant, even when, as here, a court decides only the clearly-established prong of the standard.

Carter v. Denison

110 F. App'x 6 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 24, 2004

In determin *8 ing that genuine issues of fact precluded summary judgment on the police officers’ qualified immunity claim, the district court improperly collapsed the reasonableness element of the qualified immunity analysis … The district court erred in denying qualified immunity to the police officer defendants. The summary judgment record established as a matter of law that the force the officers applied was not excessive.

John Williams v. Randy Watson

891 F.3d 701 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 31, 2018

In the motion, Defendants argued that Cullor was “factually and legally on point,” and that they could not have violated Williams’s clearly-established rights in 2013 because Cullor was not decided until 2016. … An inmate’s right to treatment for serious and painful dental conditions has been clearly-established for more than three decades. See Boyd v.

Petersen v. Carbon County

156 F.3d 1244 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 6, 1998

June 24, 1998) (qualified immunity). A. Absolute Immunity 7 Mr. … Qualified Immunity 9 Mr.

Akers v. Caperton

998 F.2d 220 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 29, 1993

Although pendent appellate jurisdiction must be exercised cautiously, it is frequently appropriate on review of a denial of qualified immunity, because, unless the complaint establishes a violation of clearly established … Because the defendants' actions did not violate "clearly established" law at the time of the transfers--and did, in fact, comply with this Circuit's established law--the district court's qualified immunity ruling must be

McVae v. Perez

120 F.4th 487 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 30, 2024

The second prong asks whether that right was “clearly established” at the time of the violation. Id. (citing Tolan, 572 U.S. at 656). … If the answer to either prong is “no,” qualified immunity applies. B.

Nam Dang Ex Rel. Dang v. Sheriff, Seminole County Florida

871 F.3d 1272 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 25, 2017

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects government officials if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … 9  Case: 15-14842 Date Filed: 09/25/2017 Page: 10 of 19 was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

DeSpain v. Uphoff

264 F.3d 965 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 10, 2001

Clearly Established Rights We next turn to the second requirement in the qualified immunity inquiry and consider whether the rights in question were clearly established when the … We therefore hold the law was “clearly established” at the time of the flooding and Ron Ruettgers’ claim of qualified immunity must fail at this juncture.

Lenz v. Winburn

51 F.3d 1540 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 12, 1995

To strip an official of qualified immunity, “the right the official is alleged to have violated must have been ‘clearly established’ in a more particularized, and hence more relevant, sense....” Anderson v. … Qualified immunity analysis asks the objective question whether a reasonable officer could have believed his conduct lawful under clearly established law in light of the information the officer possessed.

Crooker v. Metallo

5 F.3d 583 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Oct 4, 1993

appeal is whether the defendants, parole officers, violated a clearly established constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known when, in August 1989, they arrested plaintiff Stephen S. … In analyzing a claim of qualified immunity, moreover, we are concerned with clearly established constitutional or statutory rights of which a reasonable officer would have known at the time he took action, here

Hawkins v. Holloway

316 F.3d 777 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 17, 2003

due process rights, and if so, we must then ascertain whether the violations were clearly established at the time of the sheriff's alleged conduct. … Qualified immunity protects a governmental official from civil liability when his "conduct does not violate clearly established ... constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."

McBride v. Village of Michiana

100 F.3d 457 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 14, 1996

After remand, the defendants then filed a motion for summary judgment, this time seeking dismissal of McBride's claims on the basis of qualified immunity because of their belief that "there was no clearly established law … Ct. 1400 (1995), this court then stated that the "right of free speech was `clearly established' for qualified immunity purposes.

Braddy v. Florida Department of Labor & Employment Security

133 F.3d 797 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 21, 1998

In determining whether or not a state official is entitled to qualified immunity, our analysis turns on whether the state official, in the exercise of his or her discretionary authority, violated "clearly established statutory … qualified immunity.

Terrell v. Harris County

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 16, 2024

Qualified immunity We may affirm the district court on either qualified immunity prong. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. at 735. … We start with Terrell’s prong-two argument that Cannon’s actions were clearly established as unconstitutional.

Gagan v. Norton

35 F.3d 1473 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 16, 1994

that qualified immunity was warranted. … Air Capitol Aircraft Sales, Inc., 820 F.2d 1127 (10th Cir.1987), and the court reporter defendants do in fact assert the defense of qualified immunity, then we note the burden of showing that there was a violation of clearly

Angela Lee Williams, a Minor, by Her Father and Next Friend, William Hardy Williams v. Jerald M. Ellington

936 F.2d 881 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 24, 1991

The question of qualified immunity in cases involving the fourth amendment rights of students is predicated upon rights that are “clearly established” by the Supreme Court and courts within this circuit; however, such courts … Based upon the rights that were “clearly established” at the time of the search in question, we grant qualified immunity to Defendants sued in their individual capacity. As articulated in New Jersey v.

Belcher v. Norton

497 F.3d 742 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 15, 2007

“If the law did not put the officer on notice that his conduct would be clearly unlawful, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is appropriate.” Id. at 202, 121 S.Ct. 2151 ; see also Malley v. … Saucier also articulates a two-part inquiry for addressing qualified immunity claims.

Germaine Smart v. COII Ronald England

93 F.4th 1283 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 16, 2024

He found that qualified immunity barred Smart’s complaint because no clearly established law pro- hibited the officials from disciplining Smart. … Defendants cannot benefit from the shield of qualified immunity by arguing the law was not clearly established.

Virginia Viilo v. Kevin Eyre

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 27, 2008

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages if their actions did not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … immunity, and (2) the issue appealed concerned not which facts the parties might be able to prove, but rather whether or not those facts showed a violation of clearly established law.