Case law

Charles H. Von Stein v. George A. Brescher

904 F.2d 572 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 27, 1990

Intertwined with the question of probable cause is the issue of qualified immunity. … When there is no dispute about the material facts, the court has the duty to decide whether the defendants’ conduct violated *580 clearly established law. Mitchell v.

Schneider v. California Department of Corrections

345 F.3d 716 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 29, 2003

We must answer two questions when deciding whether the prison officials are entitled to qualified immunity: “(1) Was the law governing the state official's conduct clearly established? … "If the law did not put the [officials] on notice that [their] conduct would be clearly unlawful, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is appropriate.” Id.

John Larry Ray v. Patricia Pickett, J. Alan MacDoniel U.S. Parole Commissioner

734 F.2d 370 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 14, 1984

Qualified immunity is asserted as a defense, and shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … only a qualified immunity.

Davis v. City of Las Vegas

478 F.3d 1048 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 27, 2007

to qualified immunity. … immunity if the right violated was not “clearly established.”

Janet Feliciano v. City of Miami Beach

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 5, 2013

The district court denied the defendant officers qualified immunity on the claim, reasoning that although their initial entry did not violate Feliciano’s clearly established Fourth Amendment rights, they plainly exceeded … The district court rejected the officers’ claims for qualified immunity, but solely on the ground that the scope of their search, particularly of the underwear drawer and kitchen pantry, violated Feliciano’s clearly established

Maurice Lewis v. City of Chicago

914 F.3d 472 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 23, 2019

“Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statuto- ry or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Kisela v. Hughes, 138 S. … Qualified immunity requires a two- part inquiry: we must determine (1) whether facts alleged or shown by a plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) if so, whether that right was clearly established

Walter E. Edwards v. Veronica Cabrera and Harry T. Redmond

58 F.3d 290 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 20, 1995

“Qualified immunity shields [officers] from suit for damages if ‘a reasonable officer could have believed [Edwards’ arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the officers possessed.’ ” … In this case, the officers are entitled to qualified immunity if they had probable cause to arrest Edwards.

Waters v. City of Morristown

242 F.3d 353 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 22, 2001

Shuck’s actions fell outside the scope of § 1983 because they were not taken under color of state law, that Officer Graham was entitled to qualified immunity because he had acted reasonably and did not violate clearly established … Thus, the first step in any qualified immunity analysis is to determine whether a clearly established statutory or constitutional right has been violated.

Norfleet v. Arkansas Department Of Human Services

989 F.2d 289 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 29, 1993

The defendants appeal the denial of qualified immunity. 2 II. … The district court concluded the law establishing a violation of Taureen's constitutional rights was clearly established at the time of the defendants' actions and that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity

Seymour v. City of Des Moines

519 F.3d 790 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 25, 2008

right was clearly established. … Moreover, “allegations of constitutional violations that require courts to balance competing interests may make it more difficult to find the law clearly established when assessing claims of qualified immunity.”

Brockman v. Wyoming Department of Family Services

342 F.3d 1159 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 4, 2003

Sovereign Immunity -7-  The Family and Medical Leave Act authorizes qualified employees to take leave from their jobs in certain circumstances. … The State asserts that such waiver must be clearly expressed, but it offers no argument that it did not clearly waive its sovereign immunity.

Kelsey Smith v. Michael Whitsel

134 F.4th 962 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 17, 2025

The court stated that, in 2019, the law clearly established that non-medical jail staff may not ignore a detainee in obvious medical distress. See Dobbey v. Mitchell- Lawshea, 806 F.3d 938, 941 (7th Cir. 2015). … But, as we have repeatedly explained, an interlocutory appeal is available only if this court can review the denial of qualified immunity as a matter of law. Johnson v.

Armijo v. Perales

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 1, 2012

We next turn to the second prong of the qualified immunity test—whether the right violated was clearly established. … police officers in qualified immunity cases.

Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Ass'n

442 F.3d 410 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 17, 2006

Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability for actions taken within their official discretion insofar as these actions do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional- rights of which … If an official acts within his discretionary authority and asserts qualified immunity, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove that the officer violated a right so clearly established that any reasonable official in his

Joi Brown v. City of Huntsville, AL

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

Qualified Immunity “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 … Courts utilize a two-part framework to evaluate qualified immunity claims.14 One inquiry in a qualified immunity analysis is whether the plaintiff’s allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation. Hope v.

Garnett v. Undercover Officer C0039

838 F.3d 265 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 30, 2016

Qualified immunity is unavailable where, as here, the action violates an accused’s clearly established constitutional rights, and no reasonably competent police officer could believe otherwise. … In Ricciuti , the panel held that fabrication of evidence violated a “clearly established constitutional right[]” and thus the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity.

Joseph MacUba v. Matthew Deboer, Michael Youseff, Charlotte Commissioners, Individually and in Their Official Capacities

193 F.3d 1316 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 29, 1999

did not violate a clearly established principle of First Amendment law). … In subpart B, we conclude that appellants are entitled to qualified immunity with respect to the refusal to hire. A.

Buenrostro v. Collazo

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Aug 26, 1992

Hence, state ______ __________ officials exercising discretionary authority are entitled to qualified immunity insofar as their conduct does not transgress clearly established constitutional or federal statutory rights of … The next step is to ascertain ______ whether the right at issue was "clearly established" at the time of infringement. See Anderson, 483 U.S. at 640 .

Elder v. Holloway

951 F.2d 1112 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 19, 1991

Accordingly, it ruled in Holloway’s favor on qualified immunity. We have no difficulty with the district court’s decision on the record it was presented. … that we expect the district court to research independently the applicable law whenever qualified immunity is at issue.

Kimberly Diei v. Randy Boyd

116 F.4th 637 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 17, 2024

Clearly Established. … We affirmed a grant of qualified immunity because the boundaries for the regulation of off-campus speech related to school activities were not clearly established. Id. at 545.