Case law

Ezmerelda Rivera v. Manuel Fierros, Jr.

691 F. App'x 234 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 6, 2017

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, public officials “are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … When an official pleads qualified immunity, “the burden then shifts to the plaintiff, who must rebut the defense by establishing a genuine fact issue as to whether the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly

Duncan v. Gunter

15 F.3d 989 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 4, 1994

Nevertheless, Gunter has qualified immunity in this case. … State officers sued in their individual capacities are immune from liability for exercises of discretionary authority unless their conduct “violate[d] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Donald Morgan v. Michael Robinson

881 F.3d 646 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 2, 2018

Because of these factual disputes, the court denied qualified immunity, concluding a jury could find that Morgan established a violation of his constitutional rights that was clearly established at the time of the incidents … Next, because Robinson claims he is protected by qualified immunity, we apply the standard inquiry asking whether “the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and [whether] the right was clearly established

Vargas-Badillo v. Diaz-Torres

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · May 30, 1997

The Qualified Immunity Standard A. … Objective Reasonableness and Probable Cause We next assess whether the second part of the qualified immunity standard, requiring that the officers acted in an objectively reasonable fashion in light of clearly established

Marlow Humbert v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore City

866 F.3d 546 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 7, 2017

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in a § 1983 suit as long as their conduct has not violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … We therefore conclude that the Officers are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Weaver v. Shadoan

340 F.3d 398 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 13, 2003

Qualified immunity is “an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability; and like an absolute immunity, it is effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial.” … Because Plaintiff did not satisfy the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis, we need not address whether the right was clearly established.

61 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 21, 60 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 41,834 Lee Woodward, Trustee in Bankruptcy, for the Estate of Janice Butler Melinda Molina Beverly Desomber v. The City of Worland, Wyoming Washakie County, Wyoming Joint Powers Board, and Ralph Seghetti, Personally and in His Capacity as Sheriff of Washakie County Allen Tolley, Personally and in His Capacity as Chief of Police for the City of Worland Andy Williams, Personally and in His Capacity as an Officer for the City of Worland Police Department R.D. Sackett, Personally and in His Capacity as Undersheriff for Washakie County Gary Mitchell, Personally and in His Capacity as a Sergeant With the Washakie County Sheriff's Department

977 F.2d 1392 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 15, 1992

The Supervisors therefore should have been granted qualified immunity on this claim because their conduct did not violate any clearly established law constituting constructive discharge. 2. … constructive discharge claim, but they have not established qualified immunity as to the constructive discharge claims of Molina and DeSomber; Williams, Sackett and Mitchell are entitled to qualified immunity on all of the

Valdez v. City And County Of Denver

878 F.2d 1285 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 16, 1989

established" law. … Moreover, in most instances what is "clearly established" would be subject to differing views. See Garcia v.

McClendon v. Story County Sheriff's Office

403 F.3d 510 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 4, 2005

Conduct does not violate a clearly established right unless it is “plainly incompetent” or a knowing violation of a clearly established precedent. … City of Barling, 181 F.3d 914, 917 (8th Cir. 1999) (“A law enforcement officer is entitled to qualified immunity from suit for actions that are objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law and the facts known

Dougherty v. City of Covina

654 F.3d 892 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 16, 2011

Qualified Immunity “A police officer is not entitled to qualified immunity if: (1) the facts show that the officers conduct violated a plaintiffs constitutional rights; and (2) those rights were clearly established at the … Therefore, because the law was not clearly established at the time of the alleged events, the district court did not err in holding Bobkiewicz and the other police officers are entitled to qualified immunity.

Earnest Bell, Jr. v. Robert Johnson, Mark Stimpson Allen Blatter

308 F.3d 594 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 17, 2002

Qualified immunity involves a two-step inquiry. … of the qualified immunity test.

William Hunt v. County of Orange

672 F.3d 606 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 13, 2012

“Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established … If Carona “could ... have reasonably but mistakenly believed that his or her conduct did not violate a clearly estab *616 lished constitutional right,” he is entitled to qualified immunity. Greene v.

M.A.B. v. Michelle Mason

960 F.3d 1112 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 8, 2020

To determine the reasonableness of the search, and whether the lawfulness of Mason’s conduct was clearly established, the court concluded it had to consider the entire search M.A.B. alleged. … Lacking jurisdiction over the denial of qualified immunity, we also lack supplemental jurisdiction over the denial of official immunity. See Stewart v. Wagner, 836 F.3d 978, 981 (8th Cir.

Pauly v. White

817 F.3d 715 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 11, 2016

Our cases have denied qualified immunity to officers who have shot with more urgent need to do so. See, e.g., Tenorio v. … But then it flouts them, first by finding Officer White’s use of deadly force objectively unreasonable, and second by finding his actions violated clearly established law.

Parrish v. Cleveland

372 F.3d 294 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 18, 2004

If the facts do establish such a violation, the next step is to determine whether the right violated was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged offense. Id. … Because Parrish fails the first prong of the qualified immunity inquiry, we need not consider whether the right alleged to have *310 been violated was clearly established under the specific circumstances of this case.

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.

Ramon Monge-Vazquez v. Santos Rohena-Betancourt, Pablo Ortiz Lebron v. Alejandro Santiago Nieves, Etc.

813 F.2d 22 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Mar 10, 1987

Defendants moved for partial summary judgment on the issue of qualified immunity in both cases, but the district courts denied their motions. … The information relevant to the issue of qualified immunity is the nature of the position at the time of the discharge, not at some later date. 4 .

Puente v. City of Phoenix

123 F.4th 1035 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 19, 2024

The panel held that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity because they acted reasonably under the circumstances or did not violate clearly established law.  PUENTE V. … established” prong of qualified immunity.

Lowinger v. Broderick

50 F.3d 61 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Mar 22, 1995

Summary Judgment and Qualified Immunity B. … immunity is "whether a reasonable official could have believed his actions were lawful in light of clearly established law and the information the official possessed at the time of his allegedly unlawful conduct."

Robert P. MacIariello Arnold Rowell v. W.B. Sumner, Chief of Police, in His Individual and Official Capacity Paul S. Paskoff, Lancaster City Administrator, in His Individual and Official Capacity, and City of Lancaster City of Lancaster Police Department, Robert P. MacIariello Arnold Rowell v. City of Lancaster City of Lancaster Police Department, W. B. Sumner, Chief of Police, in His Individual and Official Capacity Paul S. Paskoff, Lancaster City Administrator, in His Individual and Official Capacity

973 F.2d 295 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 18, 1992

In denying summary judgment for Sumner and Paskoff, the district court ruled that the law regarding retaliation for First Amendment activity is clearly established and that the "defense of qualified immunity does not pertain … Consequently, they are entitled to qualified immunity.