Case law

Williams v. Bramer

180 F.3d 699 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 22, 1999

. § 1983 and a district court granted summary judgment in favor of the officers, finding that they were entitled to qualified immunity. … In this case, the district court held that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity with respect to all of Williams’s claims.

Eduardo Jacobs v. Raymon Alam

915 F.3d 1028 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 8, 2019

Ct. 2003 (2017) (per curiam), and even if they are, the district court erred in denying them qualified immunity. … Page 12 well-established that ‘a defendant challenging the denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds must be willing to concede the most favorable view of the facts to the plaintiff for purposes of the appeal

Richard Wertish v. Norman D. Krueger, in His Individual Capacity

433 F.3d 1062 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 9, 2006

Qualified immunity shields police officers from liability for civil damages where “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … “If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.” Saucier v.

Valdizan v. Rivera-Hernandez

445 F.3d 63 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Apr 17, 2006

"Qualified immunity protects public officials from civil liability insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … A qualified immunity defense, however, raises special considerations.

Angela Studdard v. Shelby Cty., Tenn.

934 F.3d 478 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 12, 2019

Qualified immunity shields officers from personal liability unless they violate an individual’s clearly established constitutional rights. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982). … As a general matter, the officers’ actions violated clearly established requirements in this area.

Foster Sellers v. United States of America

709 F.2d 1469 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 22, 1983

The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the United States, stating that the FBI agents were entitled to qualified immunity from damages liability because the law regarding inventory searches was unclear at … does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.

Karen Downard v. Russell Martin

968 F.3d 594 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 31, 2020

To overcome a defendant’s assertion of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show both (1) that the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the violation. … “When federal qualified immunity and Ohio state-law immunity under § 2744.03(A)(6) rest on the same questions of material fact, we may review the state-law immunity defense ‘through the lens of the federal qualified immunity

Sefeldeen v. Alameida

238 F. App'x 204 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 4, 2007

If Petitioner successfully alleges a violation of his constitutional or statutory rights, the analysis proceeds to determine whether the law governing the state official’s conduct was clearly established, such that a reasonable … As such, Petitioner fails to identify a constitutional violation, making the grant of summary judgment based on qualified immunity appropriate.

Treats v. Morgan

308 F.3d 868 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 17, 2002

Lambert, 187 F.3d at 935 . 8 Qualified immunity may protect government officials from liability for civil damages, but it is not available if an official's conduct violated "clearly established statutory or constitutional … immunity, Treats must also show that his constitutional rights were clearly established.

Liebson v. New Mexico Corrections Department

73 F.3d 274 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 2, 1996

immunity). … Accordingly, we find White and Wood wholly insufficient to establish that defendants’ actions were clearly prohibited.

James Hill v. Madison County School Board

797 F.3d 948 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 12, 2015

Qualified immunity, however, offers complete protection for individual government officials performing discretionary functions “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … A right may be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes in one of three ways: “(1) case law with indistinguishable facts clearly establishing the constitutional right; (2) a broad statement of principle within

McKelvie v. Cooper

190 F.3d 58 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 27, 1999

Similarly, the Magistrate Judge incorrectly determined that the officers were protected by qualified immunity. … . § 1983 , unless their actions violate clearly-established rights of which an objectively reasonable official would have known.” Thomas, 165 F.3d at 142 (citing Harlow v.

Ronald Young v. Eric Keyes

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 19, 2026

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability unless their actions violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Kohorst v. … Young had a clearly established right to be free from excessive force as a misdemeanant.

Abdul-Akbar v. Watson

4 F.3d 195 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 11, 1993

A. 29 The qualified immunity doctrine provides that 30 government officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … established.

Leslie Baas v. Michael A. Fewless

886 F.3d 1088 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 2, 2018

immunity, we must “evaluate whether [the] allegations, if true, establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right,” and if so, whether that right was “clearly established” such that it “provided fair warning … Appellees are therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

Thomas J. Anderson v. Jeffrey L. Larson

327 F.3d 762 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 30, 2003

IV Qualified immunity shields government officials from federal suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known. Harlow v. … The inquiry "focuses on the objective legal reasonableness of the official's acts," and the qualified immunity defense fails if the official violates a clearly established right because "a reasonably competent public official

Stuart Hamblen v. County of Los Angeles

803 F.2d 462 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 23, 1986

Appellant now complains that an instruction on the good faith/qualified immunity of the individual defendants should not have been given, because the law with respect to unreasonable seizures and excessive force was “clearly … and excessive force was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Amanda Morrison v. Board of Trustees of Green Township

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 8, 2009

This right was “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes at the time of Amanda’s seizure on October 30, 2002. See id. at 641. … Violation of Clearly Established Right Officer Celender finally argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity, even if he violated Amanda’s constitutional rights, because it was not clearly established at the time

Ciria v. Gerrans

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 5, 2026

Clearly Established Law We consider next whether Defendants are nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity at this stage because the law was not clearly established at the time of the events in question. … Clearly Established Law We next consider whether Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the malicious prosecution claim.

Tracey Edwards v. Benita Witherspoon

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Sep 10, 2026

not clearly established. … immunity because it was not clearly established in 2012 that the solitary confinement program was unconstitutional.