Case law

Conner v. City of Santa Ana

897 F.2d 1487 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 1, 1990

Qualified immunity from suit must be granted when the law allegedly violated is not clearly established. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). … Defendant California Towing's grant of qualified immunity must also be reversed as private parties acting under color of state law are not entitled to the qualified immunity defense. F.E. Trotter, Inc. v.

Misty Kingsland v. City of Miami

382 F.3d 1220 · 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 15

Michael Krause v. R.O. Bennett, Jr.

887 F.2d 362 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 1, 1989

The Standard for Finding Qualified Immunity State officials are qualifiedly immune from suits for civil damages alleging violations of federal law. … A defendant may establish a right to qualified immunity by showing that “it was not clear at the time of the official acts that the interest asserted by the plaintiff was protected by a federal statute or the Constitution

Gene F. Lenz, and v. Roger W. Dewey and Sue E. Mecca, And

64 F.3d 547 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 24, 1995

We reverse the district court’s denial of Defendants’ motion for qualified immunity. Background From 1986 to 1991, Mr. … Once a defendant asserts qualified immunity, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the defendants violated a law that was clearly established. Patrick v. Miller, 953 F.2d 1240, 1243 (10th Cir.1992).

Meyer v. Austin Independent School District

161 F.3d 271 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 16, 1998

of clearly established law.’”) … allegedly infringed was “clearly established.”

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.

Golino v. City of New Haven

950 F.2d 864 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 3, 1991

The Merits of the Qualified Immunity Defense The qualified or “good faith” immunity enjoyed by police officers shields them from personal liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … The right not to be arrested or prosecuted without probable cause has, of course, long been a clearly established constitutional right.

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.

Donald Ray White v. Armando Balderama

153 F.3d 237 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 31, 1998

He will then proceed to argue that, even under this factual scenario, he is entitled to qualified immunity. … established law.

Jack C. Gaines v. James H. Davis, Mike Steinhauser, Movant-Appellant

928 F.2d 705 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 15, 1991

Davis and Steinhauser argued that as municipal officers they enjoyed qualified immunity from suit, including immunity from the discovery process. … Public officials enjoy qualified immunity if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Congious v. Shaw

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 27, 2026

I would not affirm summary judgment on these grounds.1 However, Congious’s claim still fails because Shaw is entitled to Qualified Immunity. … To determine whether qualified immunity applies, courts engage in a two-part inquiry asking: (1) whether an official's conduct violated a statutory or constitutional right of the plaintiff and (2) whether the right was “clearly

Charles Kostrzewa v. City of Troy

247 F.3d 633 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 23, 2001

This circuit has held that the right to be free from excessive force, including “excessively forceful handcuffing,” is a clearly established right for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis. … As this circuit has analyzed the qualified immunity issue in excessive force cases, the question of whether the reasonable officer would have known his conduct violated clearly established constitutional rights can be answered

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.

John Sabo v. Megan Erickson

100 F.4th 880 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 30, 2024

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects gov- ernment officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … We held that the record- keeper was not entitled to qualified immunity because “closely analogous” cases, including Sample and Haygood, had clearly established the obligation of corrections officials—and recordkeepers in

William Hardin Bogard, Jr. v. Thomas D. Cook, Former Superintendent of the Mississippi State Penitentiary

586 F.2d 399 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 15, 1978

In that capacity, the qualified immunity defense is fully applicable. III. QUALIFIED IMMUNITY A. Federal Law In Procuiner v. … Strickland rule, the immunity defense would be unavailing to petitioners if the constitutional right allegedly infringed by them was clearly established at the time of their challenged conduct, if they knew or should have

Schultz v. Sundberg

759 F.2d 714 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 30, 1985

The executive officials are entitled to qualified immunity Recently, in Harlow v. … The defendants have a qualified immunity for their actions.

Barbara Conner v. Rudy G. Reinhard

847 F.2d 384 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 19, 1988

Qualified Immunity 1. General Principles The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages. … Officials cannot receive qualified immunity, however, if their conduct violated clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person *388 would have known. Id. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. at 2738 .

Daniel Simmonds v. Genesee County

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 19, 2012

To satisfy the first Saucier prong and establish a constitutional violation to defeat the officers’ claim of qualified immunity, Simmonds “is obliged to present facts which if true would constitute a violation of clearly … the violation of the constitutional right was clearly established. 533 U.S. at 201.

Miguel A. Perez Quintana v. Jose G. Gracia Anselmi, Etc.

817 F.2d 891 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Apr 24, 1987

Defendant Gracia 2 moved for summary judg *892 ment on the basis of his qualified immunity from damage actions, but the district court denied his motion. … If a position did not enjoy clearly established constitutional protection at the time of dismissal, then the defendant would be entitled to immunity from a damage action premised on the illegality of the discharge or demotion

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.