Case law

George Owens v. Matthew J. Frank

394 F.3d 490 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 6, 2005

, but ‘an unreasonable application’ of clearly established federal law, or based on ‘an unreasonable determination of the facts’ (emphasis added).”); Dixon v. … Section 2254(d)(1) provides that habeas relief shall not be afforded unless a state court reached a result "that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined

Waeschle v. Dragovic

576 F.3d 539 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 14, 2009

Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. Id. (citation omitted). … She also contends that the cornea cases serve to satisfy the second prong of Saucier' s qualified-immunity analysis because they allegedly demonstrate that the right to her mother’s brain was clearly established.

Soto v. Gaudett

862 F.3d 148 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 5, 2017

or constitutional right that was clearly established at 19 the time of the challenged conduct.'" … The Taser Deployments by Stepniewski and Robinson 7 Although Stepniewski and Robinson argue that they too were entitled to summary 8 judgment based on qualified immunity because it was not clearly established

Burnham v. 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." … 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.

Travis Rickey Childress, Slaton Jenkins Childress, Gary Dennis Childress v. Small Business Administration, A.G. McClearen and Clyde Rice, Jr.

825 F.2d 1550 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 31, 1987

We nonetheless conclude that appellants were entitled to qualified immunity for their actions because they did not act to deny the Childresses this property interest in violation of a clearly-established constitutional norm … “Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” Id. at 2816.

Luis O. Juarbe-Angueira v. Luis Rafael Arias, Director of the Public Building Authority

831 F.2d 11 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Sep 29, 1987

the law defining those rights was “clearly established in plaintiff’s favor.” … And, we have said more specifically that a defendant faced with a political discharge claim enjoys qualified immunity unless, at the time of dismissal, “it was clearly established that employees in the particular positions

Shafer v. County of Santa Barbara

868 F.3d 1110 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 29, 2017

The panel nevertheless held that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity because, at the time the incident occurred, the law was not clearly established that an officer cannot progressively increase his use of force … Prong Two: Clearly Established Law Deputy Padilla may nonetheless be entitled to a qualified immunity defense if Shafer’s Fourth Amendment rights were not clearly established at the time Deputy Padilla committed the

Elaine Thompson v. Ulenzen King

730 F.3d 742 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 20, 2013

a constitutional or statutory right; and (2) [whether] the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation." … Therefore, because the constitutional right was clearly established, the district court properly denied Officer King qualified immunity. III.

Anna Wealot v. Alvin Brooks

865 F.3d 1119 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 4, 2017

Section 1983 Claims Qualified immunity protects government officials from incurring civil liability as long as “‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … To overcome the shield of qualified immunity, a plaintiffs claim must state a violation of a clearly established federal right, and that right must have been clearly established at the time of the violation. See Nord v.

Moore v. Vega

371 F.3d 110 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 10, 2004

entitlement to qualified immunity. … : qualified immunity protects that officer unless his performance was in violation of clearly established law, or was plainly incompetent.

Walker v. Schwalbe

112 F.3d 1127 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 15, 1997

Standard of Review A district court’s ruling that an official’s conduct violated clearly established law so that the official is not entitled to a ruling of qualified immunity prior to trial is reviewed de novo. … Qualified Immunity Even though Walker has established a genuine issue of material fact, the defendants may be protected from liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity.

Izen v. Catalina

382 F.3d 566 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 23, 2004

Qualified Immunity The district court offered alternative reasons for holding that Catalina is entitled to qualified immunity. … The second prong of qualified immunity analysis requires us to determine whether the agent’s conduct violated clearly established federal law. Kinney, 367 F.3d at 350 .

Wilson v. Falk

877 F.3d 1204 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 19, 2017

DISCUSSION Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials “generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … “When a defendant asserts qualified immunity at summary judgment, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right and (2) the constitutional right was clearly established

John Dukeman, II v. Dylon Wyatt

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 12, 2026

Once qualified immunity is asserted, the plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating the law confirming his constitutional right was clearly established. Hanson, as Trustee for Layton v. … Trooper Wyatt is entitled to qualified immunity on Dukeman’s claim that he violated a clearly established right by not issuing a canine warning prior to the sheriff’s deputy’s decision to deploy his police canine.

Nicholas Coffey v. Adam Carroll

933 F.3d 577 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 5, 2019

Standard Of Review The qualified immunity doctrine protects public officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Alternatively, for purposes of qualified immunity, the officers say it is not clearly established that entry into a misdemeanor-suspect’s home when officers are in hot pursuit constitutes an unreasonable search.

Ziccardi v. City Of Philadelphia

288 F.3d 57 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 30, 2002

The individual defendants asserted the defense of qualified immunity, but the district court refused to grant summary judgment on that ground. … a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. 4 See Eddy v.

United States v. Crawford

520 F.3d 1072 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 28, 2008

Under the modified categorical approach, the prior offense may qualify as a career offender predicate offense if “ ‘documentation or judicially noticeable facts ... clearly establish that the conviction is a predicate conviction … “The government has the burden to establish clearly and unequivocally that the conviction was based on all of the elements of a qualifying predicate offense.” Kovac, 367 F.3d at 1119 .

Torres v. City of Madera

648 F.3d 1119 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 22, 2011

Qualified Immunity We must next consider whether Officer Noriega is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity because the alleged unlawfulness of her conduct was not clearly established as of October 27, 2002, for the “inquiries … The district court nonetheless determined Officer Noriega was entitled to qualified immunity because the law in 2002 did not clearly establish that an unreasonable mistaken use of force violated the Fourth Amendment.

Vondrak v. City of Las Cruces

535 F.3d 1198 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 5, 2008

We have held that, for a right to be clearly established, “there must be a Supreme Court or Tenth Circuit decision on point, or the clearly established weight of authority from other courts must have found the law to be as … right that was allegedly violated was ‘clearly established.’ ” Id.

Jeremy Meyers v. Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wi

836 F.3d 818 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2016

In  addition  to  being  a  defense,  however,  sovereign  immunity, like qualified immunity, also bears the character‐ istics  of  “immunity  from  trial  and  the  attendant  burdens  of  litigation.” Abelesz v.  … Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 672 (2009)  (qualified immunity “is both a defense to liability and a lim‐ ited  entitlement  not  to  stand  trial  or  face  the  other  burdens  of litigation.”).