Case law

Ramirez v. Oklahoma Department of Mental Health

41 F.3d 584 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 28, 1994

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, "government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … The dismissal on qualified immunity grounds with respect to defendants Goodner, LeFlore, Pendergrass and Prigmore still must be considered in light of the second Harlow prong--whether they violated "clearly established statutory

Martinez-Aguero v. Gonzalez

459 F.3d 618 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 7, 2006

immunity. outside our geographic borders.” … The words free from excessive force, and no reasonable “clearly established” appear precisely once, officer would believe it proper to beat a when Gonzalez states the test for qualified im-

Ruby v. Horner

39 F. App'x 284 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 26, 2002

Even if a search warrant is defective, government officials are protected from liability for civil damages by qualified immunity as long as their “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … It is clearly established that people are protected by the Fourth Amendment and that a search warrant must be based on probable cause.

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

Shenita Craighead v. Michael A. Lee

399 F.3d 954 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 10, 2005

Paul moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity as to the Section 1983 claims and based on official immunity as to the state-law claims. … Wilson held that summary judgment on qualified immunity was inappropriate because “[t]he current record does not conclusively establish the reasonableness of the officers’ actions or beliefs.” Wilson, 293 F.3d at 454.

Kwan Wah Liu v. Richard M. Phillips, James D. Goldman

234 F.3d 55 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 28, 2000

Yet the Supreme Court has said that for qualified immunity purposes, a competent public official is also expected ordinarily to “know the law governing his conduct” so far as it may be “clearly established.” Harlow v. … Harlow left open the possibility that there might be “extraordinary circumstances” where an official, acting in ignorance of clearly established law, might still be entitled to qualified immunity. 457 U.S. at 819 , 102 S.Ct

Kennedy v. Ridgefield

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 12, 2005

Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201 (2001), the Supreme Court established a two-prong analysis for qualified immunity cases. … forfeited his qualified immunity.

Lamont v. New Jersey

637 F.3d 177 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 4, 2011

: whether the right at issue was clearly established. … Assuming (as we must) that this view of the evidence is the one that ultimately will prevail, the troopers clearly are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Nicholas v. Miller

189 F.3d 191 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 13, 1999

Defendants are indeed entitled to qualified immunity, because the First Amendment right of association to form an inmate legal services organization was not clearly established at the time permission to form the Center was … Three questions must be answered in determining whether a right was clearly established at the time defendants acted such that defendants would not be entitled to the defense of qualified immunity: “whether the right was

Nunn v. Lynch

113 F. App'x 55 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 8, 2004

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … “The threshold inquiry a court must undertake in a qualified immunity analysis is whether plaintiffs allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation.” Hope v.

Harris v. Clay County, MS

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 11, 2022

It granted Huffman qualified immunity, concluding that Harris did not prove that the sheriff’s actions violated clearly established law. … The second is whether that right is “clearly established.” Id.

Humphrey v. Mabry

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 2, 2007

Qualified Immunity The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials from “liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Accordingly, we move to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis. 2. Were the rights “clearly established”?

Anant Kumar Tripati v. United States Immigration And Naturalization Service

784 F.2d 345 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 20, 1986

The officer had claimed qualified immunity. Again, we agree. … "[G]overnment officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

Meyer v. Austin Ind School

167 F.3d 887 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 16, 1998

amount to a violation of clearly established law.'”) … the federal right allegedly infringed was “clearly established.”

Merle T. Wagner v. Richard J. Wheeler, and Harford County Government

13 F.3d 86 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 1, 1993

The thrust of Wheeler’s qualified immunity argument was, and indeed is before this court, that he did not violate Wagner’s “clearly established constitutional right” to free speech in that Wagner’s reports of environmental … Siegert had failed to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right, thus the defense of qualified immunity was well taken.

Hjalmar Rodriguez, Jr. v. Edward H. Burnside

38 F.4th 1324 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 30, 2022

And even if they were, qualified immunity would protect the officials because the types of shower rights the inmate seeks are not clearly established. We affirm the district court. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, public officials may not be held liable for damages under § 1983 unless it is shown that they violated “a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged

Patrick James Grider v. City of Auburn, Alabama

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 7, 2010

Alternatively, at a minimum, Plaintiffs have not shown Meeks violated clearly established federal law. … Finally, to avoid qualified immunity, the Griders must establish that Meeks’s allegedly discriminatory calculations violated clearly established law. See Vinyard v. Wilson, 311 F.3d 1340, 1351–52 (11th Cir. 2002).

Terebesi v. Torresso

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 21, 2014

The defendants here allege at least some qualified  immunity defenses over which we may properly  exercise appellate jurisdiction: inter alia, that the relevant  law was not clearly established, that the application of  the … ʺAn officer is not entitled to qualified immunity  on the grounds that the law is not clearly established  every time a novel method is used to inflict injury.ʺ20      It has become commonplace for defendants in excessive

Washington v. Wilmore

407 F.3d 274 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 28, 2005

As to that claim, the district court denied qualified immunity. Because we conclude that Washington has alleged the violation of a clearly established constitutional right, we affirm. I. A. … Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages to the extent that “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Ernest Porter v. Pennsylvania Department of Cor

974 F.3d 431 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 1, 2020

establish a right for purposes of qualified immunity. … Because that right was not clearly established, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on Porter’s procedural due process claim.