Case law

Doug Greisen v. Jon Hanken

925 F.3d 1097 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 31, 2019

Hanken is not entitled to qualified immunity on the public concern issue By 1995, it was clearly established that the misuse of public funds is a matter of public concern. See Johnson, 48 F.3d at 425. … Hanken is thus not entitled to qualified immunity. C.

Turney v. Waterbury

375 F.3d 756 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 14, 2004

clearly established constitutional rights. … The parties here agree that Turney enjoyed a clearly established constitutional right to be protected from the risk of suicide.

Grand Cid Camilo v. Diaz Martinez

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Apr 28, 1999

<br> Because of its focus on tort causation and culpability, <br>the qualified immunity analysis in neglect-of-risk cases seldom, if <br>ever, raises abstract questions of law about whether a right was <br>clearly established … We concluded <br>that the applicable law, and, hence, the plaintiffs' asserted <br>right, was clearly established by 1993.

Thomas R. Salzer v. Frederick Dellinger

54 F.3d 779 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 8, 1995

violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … Under these facts, we conclude that the deputy sheriffs did not violate any clearly established right, so they were entitled to qualified immunity under Sec. 1983. 9 See, e.g., England v.

Clement v. City of Glendale

518 F.3d 1090 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 11, 2008

Officer Young did not violate Clement’s clearly established right by calling for her car to be towed. … In deciding a motion for summary judgment in a section 1983 action we are bound to look first to whether there was a constitutional violation and then to whether defendants have qualified immunity, even if the qualified immunity

Knowlton v. Shaw

704 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jan 4, 2013

of a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … Given our ruling, we need not reach whether qualified immunity applies or delve into the merits of Knowlton's due process claim. instance is protected by absolute immunity. Buckley, 509 U.S. at 272.

Schlothauer v. Robinson

757 F.2d 196 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 14, 1985

Police officers, however, are afforded qualified immunity from liability in suits brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 557 , 87 S.Ct. 1213, 1219 , 18 L.Ed.2d 288 (1967). … Thus we cannot say that the law was *198 “clearly established” at the time of Schlothauer’s arrest.

Akande, Adetunji v. Grounds, Randall

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 9, 2009

No. 07-3800 7 Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages where their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … Katz, the Supreme Court established a two-step inquiry for courts ruling upon the qualified immunity issue.3 See Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201 (2001).

Aitson v. Campbell

989 F.2d 507 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 1, 1993

Campbell to ask for absolute immunity (she only sought qualified immunity) bars the district court from granting it sua sponte. … The doctrine of qualified immunity does not protect those who violate "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v.

98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8049, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,185 Theodore Chester Kulas v. Cso Valdez Officer Kotzin, Psychiatric Ward, Madison Street Jail Officer Fay Officer Lambert Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, Sgt. Medina, Corrections Officer, Psychiatric Ward at Madison Street Jail Sgt. Ceselini Potts Hoffert Osran

159 F.3d 453 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 29, 1998

have known. 30 The Court stated that the limits of qualified immunity should be defined in objective terms, with the reasonableness of an official's conduct measured by reference to clearly established law. … However, "[i]f the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct."

Devose v. Addison

172 F.3d 632 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 20, 1999

immunity is deciding whether the claimant has asserted the violation of a clearly established federal right. … Devose identified a clearly established right not to be arrested in the absence of probable cause, see Hannah v.

Burrell v. Virginia

395 F.3d 508 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 27, 2005

We review a district court's denial of qualified immunity de novo. Rogers v. Pendleton, 249 F.3d 279, 285 (4th Cir.2001). … If the challenged conduct did violate a clearly established constitutional right, qualified immunity does not bar the suit. Id. at 200, 202, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

Malek v. Haun

26 F.3d 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 10, 1994

Providing further explanation, the district court ruled that defendant Larsen was entitled to at least qualified immunity and the sole allegation concerning Larsen was insufficient to overcome qualified immunity. … We also agree that the defendants are immune from damages liability based on their entitlement to either absolute or qualified immunity. See Russ v. Uppah, 972 F.2d 300, 303 (10th Cir.1992); Knoll v.

Wright v. Jefferson County Police Dept.

14 F.3d 603 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 8, 1993

However, when intent is an element of the substantive claim, the court must examine the officer's intent under a qualified immunity analysis to determine if he has violated "clearly established" law. See Poe v. … Thus, we affirm the District Court's order granting summary judgment for the officers on the basis of qualified immunity.

Gomez v. Atkins

296 F.3d 253 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 11, 2002

We review de novo a district court’s denial of qualified immunity. … Public officials engaged in the performance of discretionary functions are. entitled to qualified immunity from civil liability to the extent “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Wye Oak Technology, Inc. v. Republic of Iraq

24 F.4th 686 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 4, 2022

Shaw, 478 U.S. 310, 318 (1986)), a foreign state “will not be found to have [explicitly] waived its immunity unless it has clearly and unambiguously done so[,]” id. … Indeed, an established treatise that Wye Oak relies on specifically states that “the [commercial activities] exception’s second clause provides for jurisdiction where a defendant qualifying as a ‘foreign state’ under the

Amanda Rakes v. Jonathan Roederer

117 F.4th 968 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 25, 2024

Rakes has established a triable state-created danger claim, they are nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity. … To violate clearly established law—the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis—“existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate.”

Dunigan v. Noble

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 29, 2004

Moreover, I do not believe that Officer Noble should be immune from liability, as his conduct was objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law at the time of the incident. … The doctrine of qualified immunity is driven by the notion that, although a government official may have violated a citizen’s rights, “‘[i]f the law at that time was not clearly established, an official could not . . . fairly

No. 90-1166

960 F.2d 1493 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 11, 1992

to balance competing interests may make it more difficult to find the law "clearly established" when assessing claims of qualified immunity. … The availability of qualified immunity does not depend on whether a constitutional violation has occurred.

Shirley DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otto E. PASSMAN, Congressman of the United States, Defendant-Appellee

544 F.2d 865 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 3, 1977

Davis’s complaint clearly meets the Snowden requirements. … Qualified Immunity The inapplicability of speech or debate protection does not foreclose Representative Passman from asserting the same qualified immunity available to other government officials. See generally Wood v.