Case law

Parker v. Williams

862 F.2d 1471 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 11, 1989

Amerson did assert qualified immunity at trial, but the district court held that he was not entitled to such immunity. Because the availability of qualified immunity is a question of law, Mitchell v. … Jones, 835 F.2d 82, 84-85 (5th Cir.1987) 6 That right was clearly established at the time of the incidents challenged in this case. See Ingraham v.

Argueta v. United States Immigration & Customs Enforcement

643 F.3d 60 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 14, 2011

It is also well established that government officials are immune from liability for damages where their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … In fact, the qualified immunity doctrine exists to encourage vigorous and unflinching enforcement of the law. See, e.g., id. at 1953-54.

Ronald Stodghill v. Charles Brown

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 9, 2008

The SAB members moved to dismiss the claim on the basis of qualified immunity. … The SAB members sought qualified immunity.

Jefferson v. Ysleta Independent School District

817 F.2d 303 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 20, 1987

Finding that the pleadings allege conduct which "violate[s] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known," Harlow v. … Analysis 5 The defense of qualified immunity protects a public official from liability in the performance of his duties unless he violates a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of another known to or knowable

State of Idaho v. Coeur D'Alene Tribe

794 F.3d 1039 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 22, 2015

Thus, the immunity inquiry necessarily requires the determination of whether Hold’em qualifies as Class III gaming.  STATE OF IDAHO V. COEUR D’ALENE TRIBE 9 A. … In a handful of clearly distinguishable cases, courts have determined that gaming statutes permitting casino nights for charitable purposes establish that gaming is “explicitly authorized by the laws of the State” and that

Rellergert v. Cape Girardeau County

924 F.2d 794 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 4, 1991

DISCUSSION The law of qualified immunity is especially susceptible to the adage that the law *796 applied to hard facts yields unfortunate results. … While we conclude that the law is clearly established that jailers must take measures to prevent inmate suicides once they know of the suicide risk, we cannot say that the law is established with any clarity as to what those

Light v. Haws

472 F.3d 74 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 3, 2007

The fate of an official with qualified immunity depends upon the circumstances and motivations of his actions, as established by the evidence . . . . … "; see Schrob, 948 F.2d at 1407 n. 5 ("[A]n official with qualified immunity must establish that the[ ] conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

Estate of Redd Ex Rel. Redd v. Love

848 F.3d 899 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 13, 2017

Once a defendant asserts qualified immunity, “the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish (1) a violation of a constitutional right (2) that was clearly established” at the time of the violation. … With this in mind, we of course also agree with the district court’s conclusion that the Fourth Amendment right at issue in this case wasn’t clearly established.

Charles M. Grossman, M.D. v. City of Portland, a Public Body, and Todd Davis

33 F.3d 1200 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 6, 1994

legal reasonableness’ of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.” … immunity from personal liability, provided they can establish objective good faith in relying on the town’s policy.”).

Bobbie Coleman v. Gannen Manthey

349 F.3d 534 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 12, 2003

But if the answer is yes, "the next, sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established. … Appellants do not argue that the right was not "clearly established" as defined by Saucier.

Spiegel v. City of Chicago

106 F.3d 209 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 4, 1997

Instead, the court upheld the district court’s dismissal of the suit on the ground of qualified immunity. … Officers enjoy qualified immunity so long as their conduct did not violate a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time they acted. Kernats, 35 F.3d at 1176 (citing Harlow v.

Susan Vaughn v. Christopher Gray

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 6, 2009

and, if so, (2) whether the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation such that a reasonable official would understand his conduct was unlawful.” … In this case, Appellants argue only that Vaughn has not established the deprivation of a constitutional right, and therefore, we need not address whether that right was “clearly established.”

Barnes v. Wright

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 2, 2006

Qualified Immunity “[T]he Supreme Court [has] held that ‘government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … Second, we consider whether the violation involved a clearly established constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known.

Droz v. McCadden

580 F.3d 106 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 7, 2009

This belief was sufficient to establish arguable probable cause for the arrest. McCadden is therefore entitled to qualified immunity on the false arrest charge. … McCadden is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. Because neither of the underlying section 1983 causes of action can be established, the claim for conspiracy also fails. See Singer v.

Betty Thompson Donald Thompson v. Upshur County, Tx, R.D. Cross, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Upshur County, Tx Paula Whorton, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Jailer, Upshur County Robert Cromley, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Lieutenant, Upshur County Jail, Betty Thompson Donald Thompson v. Upshur County, Tx, Eugene Tefteller, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Sheriff, Marion County, Tx

245 F.3d 447 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 15, 2001

To ensure that qualified immunity serves its intended purpose, it is of paramount import, during step two, to define "clearly established law" at the proper level of generality. Anderson v. … Thus, the issue as to sheriff Cross's claim of qualified immunity is whether his policies were objectively reasonable in light of then clearly established law.

Rogers v. Clark County School District

52 F. App'x 911 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 9, 2002

Goldman argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate Rogers’ clearly established constitutional rights. … If we find a violation of a constitutional right, we consider whether the right was clearly established. Id.

Estate of Jason Waterhouse v. Direzza

129 F.4th 1212 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 20, 2025

Clearly Established Law Finally, although we have held that there was no Fourth Amendment violation, we say a few words about the second prong of qualified immunity—whether a violation was clearly established. … Law is clearly established “if a plaintiff (1) identifies an on-point Supreme Court or published Tenth Circuit decision or (2) shows the clearly established weight of authority from other courts has found the law to be

Joel LeVine v. Kathleen Roebuck

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 4, 2008

The court then granted Youngs qualified immunity because “the law of the Eighth Circuit was not clearly established at the time of [her] actions.” In Saucier v. … But that proposition was not clearly established by those cases, or by any other.

Manning, Steven v. Miller, Gary

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 21, 2004

Similarly, Manning is able to meet the second prong of the qualified immunity test: his constitutional due proc- ess right was “clearly established” at the time he asserts it was violated. … Because Manning is able to show that he is asserting a violation of a constitutional right and that the right was clearly established at that time, Agents Buchan and Miller cannot prevail on their qualified immunity claim

D. Scott Forrester v. Kimberly Rosa

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 7, 2005

Johnson and Rosa moved for summary judgment, arguing they are entitled to qualified immunity because Forrester cannot prove any violation of clearly established -5- constitutional … , Forrester has failed to allege a violation of a clearly established due process right, and Rosa and Johnson are entitled to qualified immunity.