Case law

Tyree Bell v. Officer Peter Neukirch

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 28, 2020

was clearly established at the time.” … If their unlawful conduct was clearly established, then they are not entitled to qualified immunity. See id.

Sigley v. Parma Heights

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 10, 2006

Qualified immunity protects government officials who perform discretionary functions from civil liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … was entitled to qualified immunity.

Miller v. Clinton

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 1, 2008

The court concluded that Judge Saxton had not established that he was entitled to qualified immunity because the record did not support his claim that he had not violated Miller’s clearly established constitutional rights … Discussion The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions Afrom liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

Doe v. Groody

361 F.3d 232 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 19, 2004

But the immunity is forfeited if an officer's conduct violates "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Wilson v. … The District Court held that it did, and the officers argue that the District Court applied the "clearly established" test at too high a level of generality. 49 We agree that in determining whether a right is "clearly established

Carter v. Detroit

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 27, 2005

Finally, to complete the qualified immunity analysis, this right was clearly established at the time of Hollins’s violation. … The right that Hollins violated was therefore clearly established. Under the facts alleged by the Estate, Hollins is not entitled to qualified immunity. The district court’s denial of summary judgment was proper.

Purisch v. Tennessee Technological University

76 F.3d 1414 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 1, 1996

Government officials who perform discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from civil damage suits arising out of the performance of their official duties unless they violate “clearly established constitutional … Only if we find a constitutional violation do we examine whether it involved “clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

William Irving v. Warren Cressey

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 7, 2008

A state official is protected from suit by qualified immunity so long as the official’s “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Defendants are properly denied qualified immunity only if the constitutional right violated was clearly established at the time of the offense. Reece, 60 F.3d at 491.

Thomas A. Schopler, D.D.S. v. Rupert Bliss

903 F.2d 1373 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 22, 1990

Evidence that a state has waived sovereign immunity in its own courts is not by itself sufficient to establish waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit in federal court. … In order to meet this requirement, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the official’s alleged misconduct was “objectively unreasonable” in that it violated clearly established law.

Arthur Lance Bier v. Paul D. Fleming and Charles I. Alatis

717 F.2d 308 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 19, 1983

Paul Fleming asserts that he acted in good faith and therefore should be accorded the defense of qualified immunity. … We conclude that the district court erred in not granting Fleming the defense of qualified, good faith immunity.

Rowland v. Perry

41 F.3d 167 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Nov 29, 1994

We shall first address Perry’s various claims of qualified immunity. The basic rules of § 1983 immunity are well known. … The law thus shields police officers from civil liability unless the officer reasonably should have known that his actions violated clearly established constitutional rights. Harlow v.

Doe v. Warren Consolidated Schools

93 F. App'x 812 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 24, 2004

not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Plaintiffs’ constitutional right to be free from sexual abuse was therefore clearly established at the time of the alleged abuse.

McCarthy v. Mayo

827 F.2d 1310 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 14, 1987

But a governmental official has immunity for discretionary acts so long as those acts do not violate a clearly established constitutional right. Harlow v. … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) (qualified immunity available where the right violated was not clearly established at the time the act took place).

Norse v. City of Santa Cruz

629 F.3d 966 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 15, 2010

On the eve of trial, the district court sua sponte granted judgment against him, holding that the city officials were entitled to qualified immunity. … his clearly established rights.”

Wells v. Brown

891 F.2d 591 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 12, 1989

immunity” from damages by violating “clearly established” rights protected by the Due Process Clause. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), the Supreme Court predicted that qualified immunity would “permit the resolution of many insubstantial claims on summary judgment.”

William Gardner v. Jason Evans

920 F.3d 1038 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 4, 2019

this constitutional notice requirement was clearly established. … Nevertheless, the inspectors would be immune from suit if the plaintiffs did not have a clearly established right to be free from eviction based  No. 17-1933 Gardner, et al. v.

Adams v. St. Lucie County Sheriff's Department

998 F.2d 923 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 25, 1993

Id. at 557-58, 105 S.Ct. at 2832 (Brennan, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). 14 Judicial fact-finding on such issues would ensure that qualified immunity serves as an immunity from suit, particularly in cases … Nevertheless, after this opinion, the law is clearly established that law enforcement officers may not use deadly force to apprehend a fleeing misdemeanant 1 I am somewhat concerned by the fact that defense counsel stipulated

Brown v. City of Fort Lauderdale

923 F.2d 1474 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 19, 1991

The court dismissed the § 1983 claims against both Cochran and Hoffman based on qualified immunity. … It stated merely that the defendants were entitled to immunity because Brown had failed to allege facts demonstrating that the constitutional right allegedly infringed was clearly established at the time of their conduct

Rellergert v. Cape Girardeau County, Missouri

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

DISCUSSION 10 The law of qualified immunity is especially susceptible to the adage that the law 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

Peta v. Rasmussen

298 F.3d 1198 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 7, 2002

Qualified Immunity 37 PeTA argues that the defendants did not assert qualified immunity below and therefore cannot assert it on appeal. … Tinker and Grayned clearly established the right to engage in expressive activity on a sidewalk adjacent to a school if no material disruption occurs. Therefore, the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Vazquez-Valentin v. Santiago-Diaz

459 F.3d 144 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Aug 22, 2006

identified a three-step process for evaluating qualified immunity claims: (1) whether the claimant has alleged the deprivation of an actual constitutional right; (2) whether the right was clearly established at the time of … The documents that we discussed above clearly are relevant to the qualified immunity analysis and should be evaluated by the district court when it considers that issue again.