Case law

Blank v. Bell

634 F. App'x 445 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 19, 2016

Upon an invocation of qualified immunity, however, “the usual summary judgment burden of proof is altered”. Michalik v. Hermann, 422 F.3d 252, 262 (5th Cir. 2005). … To defeat the defense of qualified immunity, Blank must plead facts to show: a violation of a constitutional or statutory right; and, in the light of clearly established law, Nurse Bell’s conduct was objectively unreasonable

Estrada v. Rhode Island

594 F.3d 56 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 4, 2010

“The doctrine of 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 … the right was ‘clearly established’ *63 at the time of the defendant’s alleged violation.”

Hardin v. Hayes

957 F.2d 845 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 9, 1992

Baldwin County Bd. of Educ., 908 F.2d 1499 , 1503 (11th Cir.1990). 13 Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil damages "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … Accordingly, he is entitled to qualified immunity. 27 Based upon the foregoing facts, Sheriff Hayes is likewise entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity.

Holloway v. Reeves

277 F.3d 1035 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 24, 2002

The defendant board members maintained that they were entitled to qualified immunity. 5 We review a rejection of a qualified immunity defense de novo. Burnham v. Ianni, 119 F.3d 668 , 673 (8th Cir. 1997) (en banc). … "Qualified immunity shields state officials from civil liability when 'their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.' " Doe v.

Genas v. State of New York Department of Correctional Services

75 F.3d 825 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Feb 12, 1996

As a result, a judge evaluating a claim of qualified immunity must first determine whether the federally protected right the defendant is accused of violating was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … If the right at issue was not clearly established at the time of the violation, the court should sustain the qualified immunity defense. Robison, 821 F.2d at 920 .

Kingsland v. City of Miami

369 F.3d 1210 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 11, 2004

Qualified Immunity 1. General Principles If the defendant officers are entitled to qualified immunity, we must affirm summary judgment in their favor. … “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Hammond v. Kunard

148 F.3d 692 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 11, 1998

The doctrine of qualified immunity generally shields officials who perform discretionary functions from liability for civil damages "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense should ordinarily fail because a reasonably competent officer should know the law governing his conduct.

Nader v. Blackwell

545 F.3d 459 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 29, 2008

Qualified immunity shields an official from suit even when his action violates constitutional rights, unless “the right is so clearly established that a reasonable official would understand that what he was doing violates … was lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information he possessed.”

Ronald Curtis v. W. Anthony

710 F.3d 587 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 6, 2013

As in the instant case, the individual defendants asserted qualified immunity defenses. … Such efforts would have “violate[d] clearly established constitutional rights.” Id. (citation omitted).

Allen v. Brown

320 F. Supp. 3d 16 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 1, 2018

However, the doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … Qualified Immunity Defendants' qualified immunity argument is similarly premature. Chief Brown is entitled to qualified immunity unless his conduct violated "clearly established" rights.

Raymond Benitez v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital

992 F.3d 229 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Mar 23, 2021

It explained “[p]reviously, the Fourth Circuit has granted absolute immunity from antitrust damages to a municipal hospital established under Chapter 131E, upholding the determination that the hospital qualified as a ‘ … Benitez has consistently argued that even if the Hospital Authority was a “local government” when it was established, it has outgrown its immunity.

LEVAN v. George

604 F.3d 366 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 28, 2010

First, as the precedential case for qualified immunity, Mitchell limited its holding to appeals challenging only the purely legal issue of whether the law was clearly estab- lished; it does not allow appellate courts to examine … It is obvious to us that the separ- ability requirement is very clearly lacking here.

Young v. County Of Fulton

160 F.3d 899 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 16, 1998

established at the time of the events in this case. 13 Government agents enjoy qualified immunity when they perform discretionary functions if either (1) their conduct "did not violate clearly established rights of which … qualified immunity.

Vathekan v. Prince George's County

154 F.3d 173 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 28, 1998

She also asserts that under the Fourth Amendment Simms's actions were objectively unreasonable under clearly established law and that he therefore is not entitled to qualified immunity. … of this case were undisputed, we would proceed by applying the clearly established law to determine whether Simms is entitled to qualified immunity.

Miller v. Administrative Office of the Courts

448 F.3d 887 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 23, 2006

Whether, considering the allegations in a light most favorable to Miller, her termination violated a “clearly established” constitutional right The second step of the qualified immunity analysis is … to determine whether the constitutional right that was violated was “clearly established.”

Clemmons v. Estate of Brooks

477 F.3d 962 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 12, 2007

Qualified Immunity We review de novo the district court's denial of qualified immunity to Investigator Brooks. McClendon v. Story County Sheriff's Office, 403 F.3d 510, 515 (8th Cir. 2005). … To determine whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, we engage in a two-part analysis.

Roger Moore v. Kenneth Carpenter, in His Individual and Official Capacity City of Poplar Bluff Joe Ward

404 F.3d 1043 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 21, 2005

The district court * granted summary judgment to the officers on the bases of qualified immunity and issue preclusion. … Moore appeals arguing the officers were not entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity.

Sanchez v. Pereira-Castillo

590 F.3d 31 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Dec 23, 2009

State actors may be immune from suit on the basis of qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity The defendants pressed a defense of qualified immunity in their motions to dismiss.

Anthony Gibson v. Jeffrey Kilpatrick

734 F.3d 395 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 29, 2013

was clearly established. … Discussion To rebut a defendant’s qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff must show: “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time

Peete v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville

486 F.3d 217 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 22, 2007

clearly established.” … The Court held that Champion’s arrest and restraint by police constituted a clearly established unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment and denied the police officers’ argument that they were entitled to qualified