Case law

Ludwig v. Anderson

54 F.3d 465 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 15, 1995

This is not to say that Ludwig's status as an emotionally disturbed person entitles him to any additional, clearly established constitutional rights which would be relevant to the qualified immunity determination. … "The issue on the merits is whether the officer violated the law when the arrest was made, whereas the immunity question is whether the officer violated clearly established law when the arrest was made." Id.

May v. Baldwin

109 F.3d 557 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 19, 1997

The affirmative defense of qualified immunity shields public officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages under § 1983 “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … CONCLUSION We find that May’s right to avoid loosening his dreadlocks was not clearly established at the time of the alleged violations of RFRA, and the prison officials are entitled to qualified immunity from damages.

Michael J. Bakalis v. Jenni Golembeski, Mark R. Stephens, Merrill Becker

125 F.3d 576 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 18, 1997

In the earlier appeal, we determined that the defendants could not assert the defense of qualified immunity. We held that the law was clearly established that Dr. … Summary judgment determinations “are appealable when they resolve a dispute concerning an ‘abstract issu[e] of law1 relating to qualified immunity, typically the issue whether the federal right allegedly infringed was ‘clearly

Wilson v. Schillinger

761 F.2d 921 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 1, 1985

The Supreme Court has extended the application of the Harlow “clearly established rights” standard for qualified immunity to cases, such as this one, in which defendants are sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1982) for alleged … Thus, to avoid the recovery-preclusive effects of qualified immunity, plaintiff must have proven that defendants had reason to know they were violating plaintiffs clearly established equal protection rights by enforcing Directive

Jackson Warren v. City of Lincoln, Nebraska James Breen Sandra L. Myers and David M. Beggs

816 F.2d 1254 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 17, 1987

Qualified Immunity. … Once a court determines as a matter of law that a legal standard governing the governmental action at issue was clearly established, there is no qualified immunity.

Rankin v. Klevenhagen

5 F.3d 103 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 18, 1993

First, we determine whether the plaintiff has "allege[d] the violation of a clearly established constitutional right." Siegert v. Gilley, --- U.S. ----, ----, 111 S.Ct. 1789, 1793, 114 L.Ed.2d 277 (1991). … "Whether a defendant asserting qualified immunity may be personally liable turns on the objective legal reasonableness of the defendant's actions assessed in light of clearly established law." Mouille v.

Green v. Bauvi

46 F.3d 189 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 25, 1995

immunity. 23 Public officials enjoy a qualified immunity from suits for damages "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Assuming that, in whatever circumstances are at issue, the inmate's right to a hearing within a reasonable time was clearly established at the time of his confinement, the officials are entitled to qualified immunity if it

Larry U. Josey Harry H. Lloyd Robert Gibson v. William Salisbury, Leonard Riccinto the City of Detroit

14 F.3d 601 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 18, 1993

He discovered evidence of crack cocaine and money that clearly supported Riccinto's report to him. 3 20 We find no basis for denying Salisbury's claim of qualified immunity under these circumstances. … CITY OF DETROIT 21 The City of Detroit is not before us on any claim of good faith or qualified immunity as are the individual defendants in this appeal.

Harrison v. Barkley

219 F.3d 132 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 17, 2000

Defendants moved for summary judgment on their qualified immunity defense, among other grounds. … Qualified Immunity The defendants enjoy qualified immunity from Harrison’s suit if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known,” Harlow

Lowery v. Stovall

92 F.3d 219 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 6, 1996

there was no clearly established standard to govern Redd's actions. … AFFIRMED _________________________________________________________________ 7 In any event, the district court properly found that Redd would be entitled to qualified immunity on this claim because there was no clearly established

Bass v. Attardi

868 F.2d 45 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 14, 1989

legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.” … We have held that for a right to be “clearly established," there must be “some, but not precise, factual correspondence” between the case at hand and prior decisions. See People of Three Mile Island v.

Shaw v. Schulte

36 F.4th 1006 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 6, 2022

To overcome a qualified immunity defense, “the onus is on the plaintiff to demonstrate ‘(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time … Furthermore, the undisputed facts, including the minimal weight given to the factors not in dispute, are sufficiently similar to Vasquez to permit the Shaws to overcome the clearly established prong of qualified immunity

Kathryn Pollard v. City of Columbus, Ohio

780 F.3d 395 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 5, 2015

Because a municipality is not entitled to qualified immunity, Owen v. … Thus, there is a clear connection between the City’s appeal and the officers’ claims of qualified immunity.

Cathryn E. Hinshaw v. LOPFI

436 F.3d 997 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 30, 2006

Qualified immunity protects public officials from personal liability under § 1983 when "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … The court held that the legislators, who were not the decisionmakers, were entitled to qualified immunity because there was no clearly established federal right for an individual "to prevent legislators from exercising their

Pelletier v. Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco

130 F.3d 429 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 3, 1997

The qualified immunity defense shields government agents’ liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Henderson, 940 F.2d 465, 475 (9th Cir.1991), it is in any event not clearly established.

Estate of Jason Thomson v. Thomas Behn

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 9, 2026

claims was appropriate because the officers are entitled to qualified immunity. … We review an officer’s entitlement to qualified immunity de novo, asking whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time and under the circum- stances presented. Beaman v.

Bartholomew v. PA

221 F.3d 425 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 7, 2000

We exercise plenary review of a District Court’s denial of summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. See Abbott v. … We note in this connection that, for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis, the “clearly established constitutional right” should be set forth with specificity. See Wilson v.

Barrett v. United States

798 F.2d 565 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 31, 1986

insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Where plaintiffs allege the violation of a clearly established Constitutional norm, and that the offensive conduct gave rise to a remedy in damages, qualified immunity is not applicable.

Castle v. Appalachian Technical College

627 F.3d 1366 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 21, 2010

Qualified immunity shields government officials sued in their individual capacity from liability for civil damages if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … However, notwithstanding the constitutional violation, we cannot say that the district court erred in deciding that, for qualified immunity purposes, it was not clearly established at the time Castle was suspended that

Bonner v. Anderson

81 F.3d 472 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 17, 1996

OPINION BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge: Claiming qualified immunity, D.R. … Application of the qualified immunity defense requires a court to answer two questions: (1) whether the constitutional right allegedly violated was clearly established, and (2) whether genuine issues of material fact exist