Case law

Lunini, Joseph A. v. Grayeb, Charles V.

395 F.3d 761 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 18, 2005

on grounds of qualified immunity. … The touchstone of the qualified immunity inquiry is an alleged violation of “clearly established” statutory or con- stitutional rights.

Borello, Ronald T. v. Allison, Richard

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 11, 2006

violated any of [the plaintiff’s] clearly established constitutional rights.’ ” Id. … Because Defendant has not shown that his constitutional rights were violated, we need not move to the second step of the qualified immunity analysis: whether those rights were clearly established at the time of the attack

Remo Benigni, Dba the Silver Fox v. City of Hemet Roger Miller Jesse Pease Scott Jernigan, Defendants

853 F.2d 1519 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 15, 1988

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY This question is properly before the court because the individual defendants moved for a directed verdict on the basis of qualified immunity and subsequently offered it as a ground for judgment NOV. … Thus we conclude that any error in the qualified immunity instruction was harmless.

Murray v. Earle

405 F.3d 278 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 13, 2005

Fifth Amendment Violation: Qualified Immunity In undertaking a qualified immunity analysis, we must first determine whether the plaintiff has suffered a violation of his constitutional rights and, if so, whether a … Clearly Established Law To overcome a claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must establish that the right an official is alleged to have violated was “clearly established,” i.e., sufficiently clearly defined that

Farrell v. Montoya

878 F.3d 933 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 27, 2017

“[The] defense of qualified immunity . . . shields public officials from damages actions unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law. … “In this circuit, to show that a right is clearly established, the plaintiff must point to a Supreme Court or Tenth Circuit decision on point, or the clearly established weight of authority from other courts must have found

Dwayne Walker v. Dr. Ronald Shansky, Dr. Gandhy, Dr. R. Shroff, and Dr. Mark Carise

28 F.3d 666 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 1, 1994

We consider, as a threshold matter, the issue of qualified immunity. … Because the law here was clearly established, the defendants cannot avail themselves of the qualified immunity defense against alleged violations of the Eighth Amendment.

B.C. ex rel. B.C. v. Plumas Unified School District

192 F.3d 1260 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 20, 1999

dog sniff searches were not “clearly established” at the time of the search at issue. … “Government officials are given qualified immunity from civil liability under § 1983 ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

Dennis James Gardner v. Mary Howard

109 F.3d 427 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 12, 1997

Qualified immunity shields government officials from § 1983 damage liability unless their conduct violates "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … Howard is entitled to qualified immunity.1 Gardner's Claim for Injunctive Relief. Qualified immunity bars Gardner's damage claims but not his claim for injunctive relief.

Don Gordon v. William Heath

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 24, 2026

In this interlocutory appeal, Sergeant Heath challenges that denial of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity generally shields officials from liability unless their conduct violates clearly established law. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (quoting Harlow v.

Errol Lynch v. Joseph S. Cannatella, Jr.

810 F.2d 1363 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 27, 1987

To the extent that it turns on an issue of law, the denial of a claim of qualified official immunity is immediately appealable under the “collateral order” doctrine established by Cohen v. … The thesis that official immunity abides unless “clearly established” constitutional rights are violated was first asserted 21 and still remains as a litmus to shield officials who act in a situation in which the bounds of

Brian Pfalzgraf v. Rusk County, Wisconsin

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 12, 2026

The court denied qualified immunity on this claim as well, read- ing State v. … Nor can Defendants establish a genuine dispute of fact as to qualified immunity on this claim, as they suggest late in their brief. 1 Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields state officials from liability

Easton v. Sundram

947 F.2d 1011 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 18, 1991

The qualified immunity doctrine therefore protects a govern *1016 ment official performing discretionary-functions from liability to the extent that his “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … immunity because it was not clearly established that the defamation Easton alleges constituted a deprivation of a constitutionally protected liberty interest.

Frank Robinson v. White County, AR

452 F.3d 706 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 3, 2006

Ct. 1338 (2006), the test for qualified immunity is: Government officials who perform discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity unless their alleged conduct violated clearly established … If the answer is no, we grant qualified immunity. If the answer is yes, we go on to determine whether the right was clearly established.

Yeldell v. Cooper Green Hospital, Inc.

956 F.2d 1056 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 30, 1992

Qualified immunity is available to “government officials performing discretionary functions ... insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … “[T]he relevant question on a motion for summary judgment based on a defense of qualified immunity is whether a reasonable official could have believed his or her actions were lawful in light of clearly established law and

McGowan v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 7, 2016

We hold that: (1) Rivers is entitled to qualified immunity from McGowan’s  Bivens claim because the asserted First Amendment right was not clearly  established at the time of the challenged conduct; and (2) the district court … Thus, in light of the absence of authority clearly establishing the claimed  right, we are constrained to hold that Rivers is entitled to qualified immunity  from McGowan’s Bivens claim. 

Chalkboard, Inc. Karen M. Hoyt v. Susan Brandt Boyd Dover Lucinda Blair Andy Harclerode Sherry Meredith Lloyd Novick Douglas X. Patino Darwin Cox

902 F.2d 1375 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 11, 1990

While the right to due process is clearly established under the fourteenth amendment, the issue of qualified immunity cannot be resolved at such a high level of generality. Anderson v. … Defendants accordingly failed to establish that they were entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the ground of qualified immunity.

Coomer v. Make Your Life Epic

98 F.4th 1320 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 23, 2024

a violation of “clearly established” law. … The Court noted that the district court’s qualified-immunity order had gone beyond “the purely legal issue [of] what law was ‘clearly established,’” id. at 313, and had “resolved a fact-related dispute about the

David Ermold v. Kim Davis

130 F.4th 553 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 6, 2025

Qualified Immunity Davis argues that she is entitled to qualified immunity because she did not violate any right that Obergefell “clearly established.” Appellant’s Brief at 42–50. … Qualified immunity protects government officials from personal liability so long as they do not violate a plaintiff’s “clearly established” constitutional rights. Pearson v.

Ralph Thomas v. Frank O. Gunter Karen Shortridge, Superintendent Robert Houston, Associate Superintendent

32 F.3d 1258 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 11, 1994

The Court held that only qualified immunity applied to prison officials. … The proper inquiry in the present case, therefore, is whether the free exercise of religion within a penal setting is a clearly established right. It has been “clearly established,” since Cruz v.

Beaver v. City of Federal Way

301 F. App'x 704 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 25, 2008

*705 MEMORANDUM ** The district court found that City of Federal Way police officers Douglas Laird and Heather Castro were entitled to qualified immunity for tasing appellant Ricky Beaver five times during his arrest on August … An officer is entitled to qualified immunity when his or her conduct is not a violation of an arrestee’s clearly established rights. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982).