Case law

Joseph Edward Schell v. K.E. Prose

125 F.3d 863 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 6, 1997

Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248 . 4 Government officials performing discretionary government functions are entitled to qualified immunity if their "conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Once a qualified immunity defense is raised, a plaintiff must show that a defendant violated a constitutional or statutory right, and that the right was clearly established such that a reasonable person in the officer's position

David Libby v. Clifford Marshall, Michael Dukakis

833 F.2d 402 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 24, 1987

whether qualified immunity shares this essential attribute of absolute immunity — whether qualified immunity is in fact an entitlement not to stand trial under certain circumstances. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), was that “where an official’s duties legitimately require action in which clearly established rights are not implicated, the public interest may be better

Horacio R. Trujillo v. Gilbert Sanchez, President, New Mexico Highlands University, in His Individual Capacity

76 F.3d 393 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 29, 1996

. 5 Qualified immunity is a question of law reviewed de novo. … clearly established when the alleged violation occurred."

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.

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

Reese v. Nelson

598 F.2d 822 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 2, 1979

After reviewing the trial record, we conclude that the evidence indisputably establishes a qualified immunity for the defendants which required the entry of directed verdicts for them. … As Navarette makes clear, the immunity defense should not be rejected if at the time that the act was committed there was no clearly established constitutional right and there was no malicious intention to deprive the plaintiff

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

Estate of Davis Ex Rel. Ostenfeld v. Delo

115 F.3d 1388 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 16, 1997

McPeak also asserts that the trial court erroneously failed to grant him qualified immunity. … We find no error in the trial court’s denial of McPeak’s claim to qualified immunity. C.

Brandie McLean v. John McGinnis

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 1, 2008

In considering a motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, the court makes two inquiries. … “If so, then [the court] determine[s] whether the constitutional right was clearly established at the time.” Flowers, 478 F.3d at 872.

Earl MORLEY, an Individual, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Egan WALKER, an Individual, Defendant-Appellant

175 F.3d 756 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 4, 1999

Investigatory or administrative functions, on the other hand, generate only qualified immunity. Kalina, 118 S.Ct. at 507 . … Such conduct falls outside the ambit of absolute immunity. Only qualified immunity is available.

Jamie S. Nabozny v. Mary Podlesny, William Davis, Thomas Blauert

92 F.3d 446 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 31, 1996

Our inquiry into Nabozny’s gender equal protection claim does not end here, because the district court granted to the defendants qualified immunity. The District itself clearly is not entitled to qualified immunity. … Next we must consider whether the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Atwater v. City of Lago Vista

165 F.3d 380 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 29, 1999

defendants were also entitled to qualified immunity. … Determining whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity is a two-step process requiring the court to determine (1) whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right and

Sanville v. Mccaughtry

266 F.3d 724 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 21, 2001

"Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Was the Right Clearly Established at the Time of the Violation? 58 We must now consider whether the guards may be held liable under sec. 1983, or whether they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Ethan Marks v. Officer Benjamin Bauer

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

Qualified immunity shields government officials from § 1983 lawsuits and liability unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known … “Where the record does not conclusively establish the lawfulness of an officer’s use of force, summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity is inappropriate.” Banks v.

Moya v. Garcia

895 F.3d 1229 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 10, 2018

But individual officials enjoy qualified immunity when their conduct does not violate “‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” Cordova v. … But because the Defendants did not violate clearly established law, I would hold that the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity and, on that basis alone, partially affirm the district court’s order.

Benito Acosta v. City of Costa Mesa

718 F.3d 800 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 3, 2013

B “Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … Under the second prong we examine whether the right was clearly established. Id.

Norman Carpenter v. Deputy Harold Gage

686 F.3d 644 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 27, 2012

In § 1983 claims, qualified immunity shields government officials from liability and the burdens of litigation unless their conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable official … To overcome the deputies’ assertion of qualified immunity, Carpenter must produce sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of fact as to whether they violated a clearly established right. A.

Robertson v. Las Animas County Sheriff's Department

500 F.3d 1185 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 10, 2007

But “[t]he doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … In order for the law to be considered 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

Rexford Kipps, Carol Kipps and Kyle Kipps v. James Caillier, Ray Authement, Nelson J. Schexnayder, Jr. And Nelson Stokley

205 F.3d 203 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 1, 2000

An issue was raised with respect to the panel majority’s qualified immunity analysis. … familial association does, in fact, exist and was clearly established at the time Kipps was fired.

Luna v. Mullenix

777 F.3d 221 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 19, 2014

Furthermore, qualified immunity recognizes that, even where constitutional rights are clearly established, an officer should not be liable for his conduct unless his conduct was unreasonable in the light of the clearly established … If there is clearly established law, the qualified immunity analysis then asks: given the factual situation the officer confronted, was his conduct unreasonable in the light of the clearly established law of which he reasonably