Case law

Anderson v. Holmes

16 F.3d 219 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 10, 1994

The district court denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment that was based on qualified immunity. … had occasion to decide issues involving qualified immunity would be a generous understatement, and we will refrain from adding to the already lengthy expositions on the subject. 4 Let it suffice to say that qualified immunity

Wayne King v. Charles Beavers

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 9, 1998

Qualified immunity protects government officials from damage liability unless their discretionary acts violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. See Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982). … We conclude Beavers is entitled to qualified immunity for two distinct reasons. No Clearly Established Federal Right.

Broidy Capital v. Benomar

944 F.3d 436 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 6, 2019

Plaintiffs bear the burden of establishing jurisdiction, here by establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that an exception to diplomatic immunity applies. … establishing that the foreign state is not entitled to immunity.

Garvin v. Wheeler

304 F.3d 628 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 28, 2002

Saucier was not a hallmark reformulation of the qualified immunity analysis. … Instead, Saucier stressed that a trial court must engage in the two-part qualified immunity analysis (asking first whether a constitutional right was violated and second whether that right was clearly established) before

Vieira v. Presley

988 F.2d 850 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 17, 1993

The district court 1 ruled that the officials were entitled to qualified immunity. … To be entitled to qualified immunity, an official's conduct must be objectively reasonable with reference to clearly established law. Davis v.

Amilcar Guilloty-Perez v. Jose Fuentes-Agostini, Pedro J. Pierluisi and Lydia Morales

196 F.3d 293 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 19, 1999

Morales and Pierluisi appeal the qualified immunity portion of the district court’s denial of summary judgment. We have no jurisdiction to hear this appeal. … Behrens allowed for interlocutory appeals from denials of summary judgment only where the district court “determines that certain conduct attributed to a defendant, if proven, will suffice to show a violation of clearly established

Russo v. Cincinnati

953 F.2d 1036 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 15, 1992

Thus, the plaintiff must effectively pass two hurdles when facing a defendant on summary judgment who claims qualified immunity. First, the allegations must "state a claim of violation of clearly established law." … overcome a qualified immunity claim.

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 19 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.

James Brunson v. Scott Murray

843 F.3d 698 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 13, 2016

The official is left with the still- important protection of qualified immunity, which defeats in- dividual liability unless his or her actions were contrary to clearly established law. Pearson v. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 807–08 (1982) (qualified immunity is the norm; absolute im- munity is appropriate only when public policy so requires); Saxner v.

Theodore Bolick v. Joel Anderson

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Mar 13, 2026

to qualified immunity. … The official invoking qualified immunity bears the burden to show that the right was not clearly established. Henry v. Purnell, 501 F.3d 374, 378 & n.4 (4th Cir. 2007).

Jesse Lyles v. City of Barling

181 F.3d 914 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 28, 1999

The qualified immunity defense shields government officials from civil liability in circumstances where "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … 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 by the officer at the time of his actions.

Estate of Bennett v. Wainwright

548 F.3d 155 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 26, 2008

Qualified immunity is a doctrine that shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … their actions were lawful under clearly established law."

Doe v. City of Roseville

296 F.3d 431 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 19, 2002

Qualified Immunity 22 This is an interlocutory appeal of the denial of qualified immunity to each of the defendant school officials. … that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation."

Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs v. County of Los Angeles

648 F.3d 986 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 12, 2011

Qualified Immunity In deciding whether to grant qualified immunity, a court must determine (a) whether the alleged facts make out a constitutional violation, and (b) whether the constitutional right at issue was clearly established … All individual defendants, however, are entitled to qualified immunity from the claims of Debs and O’Donoghue, whose right to a more substantial post-suspension hearing was not clearly established at the time of the violations

Huri v. Office of the Chief Judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County

804 F.3d 826 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 21, 2015

Qualified immunity is improper where, as here, the asserted right is clearly established at the time the conduct occurred (or constitutes an obvious violation of a constitutional right). Doe, 782 F.3d at 915 . … Huri posits that Defendant McCullum must also have been granted qualified immunity.

Albert Burnham v. Lawrence Ianni

119 F.3d 668 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 11, 1997

Long, 72 F.3d 70, 73 (8th Cir. 1995), “[t]his court has taken a broad view of what constitutes ‘clearly established law’ for the purposes of a qualified immunity inquiry.” … fact-intensive balancing test, it can rarely be considered 'clearly established' for purposes of the Harlow qualified immunity standard."21 Id. at 916 (emphasis added) (quoted in Grantham v.

Sappington v. Bartee

195 F.3d 234 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 24, 1999

We agree with him that the summary judgment record establishes his entitlement to qualified immunity, and accordingly reverse and render judgment in his favor. 1 District Judge of the Eastern District … Qualified immunity attaches to individual defendants’ actions “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

Willie Mathews v. James McDonough

480 F.3d 1265 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 16, 2007

Wilson, 311 F.3d 1340, 1346 (11th Cir. 2002)).4 Once eligibility for qualified immunity is established, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that qualified immunity is not appropriate. … Clearly Established Law Crosby argues that even if Mathews can establish a constitutional violation, Crosby is protected by qualified immunity because Mathews has failed to show that it was clearly established at

Ramon Sanchez, Also Known as Ramond Vega Lopez v. Mike Taggart Glenda Walker Lori Campbell Tracy Frank William Galloway William Cox

144 F.3d 1154 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 22, 1998

Sanchez’s clearly established constitutional rights, and thus Mr. Taggart was entitled to qualified immunity.. … Rogerson, 133 F.3d 1125, 1127, 1129 (8th Cir.1998) (official has burden of proving qualified immunity); Johnson-El v.

Teresa Wagner v. Carolyn Jones

664 F.3d 259 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 28, 2011

Clearly Established Law The second question in the qualified immunity analysis is whether the right that Dean Jones allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of the violation. … “Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense for which the defendant carries the burden of proof. The plaintiff, however, must demonstrate that the law is clearly established.” Sparr v.