Case law

Amanda Rakes v. Jonathan Roederer

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.”

Deana Jett v. Mark McCarter

57 F.3d 1069 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 5, 1995

The court therefore denied McCarter's motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, finding that if the facts stated by Jett were proven to be true, McCarter would have violated Jett's clearly established constitutional … established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. 7 Most legal rights are "clearly established" at some level of generality, however, and immunity would be impossible to obtain

Maldonado v. Josey

975 F.2d 727 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 16, 1992

He *729 asserts that qualified immunity was improper because the law was clearly established on March 16, 1987. … seizure would have a clearly established, constitutionally protected liberty interest.”

Dennis Tigue v. T. J. Swaim

585 F.2d 909 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 20, 1978

The Second Circuit had held that the federal officials were not entitled to absolute immunity but could claim only a qualified immunity based on good faith and reasonable grounds. Economou v. U. S. … The Court, in Butz , stated that a qualified immunity from damages liability should be the general rule for executive officials charged with constitutional violations. Butz v.

Rolon v. Ward

345 F. App'x 608 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 4, 2009

because the law was not clearly established or because, on the facts assumed for the purposes of appeal, the defendants’ conduct did not constitute a violation of a constitutional right.” … Accepting the facts as set forth by Rolon— as we must on a motion for summary judgment — -it cannot be said that defendants are entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law.

McMATH v. CITY OF GARY, INDIANA

976 F.2d 1026 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 3, 1992

The defendants filed a motion to dismiss McMath's amended complaint, and also raised the defense of qualified immunity. … See Ind.Code. § 34-4-16.5-3. 37 As to qualified immunity, the defendants raised such a general defense in their motion to dismiss, but did not seek immunity under the Indiana statute.

Gordon v. Kidd

971 F.2d 1087 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 7, 1992

The limits of qualified immunity are defined essentially in objective terms. … A claim of "extraordinary circumstances" coupled with a lack of knowledge about the law may establish qualified immunity. 457 U.S. at 819 , 102 S.Ct. at 2738 .

Wheeler v. City of Pleasant Grove

746 F.2d 1437 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 12, 1984

It did not award damages, however, believing that all defendants had established the qualified immunity defense. … It therefore concluded that all defendants were shielded from monetary liability by the qualified immunity defense. Id. at 209 .

Cordero v. De Jesus-Mendez

867 F.2d 1 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jan 24, 1989

discharges, and he is, therefore, entitled to qualified immunity. … The question of qualified immunity poses no problem.

Jenkins v. Medford

119 F.3d 1156 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 7, 1997

law. 8 Medford argues on appeal, as he did in the court below, that he is entitled to qualified immunity because the deputies have not alleged a violation of a "clearly established" right; he is immune from suit under the … This comment, however, directly construes the following language from Mitchell: 75 Unless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled

David Demers v. Erica Austin

746 F.3d 402 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 29, 2014

light of clearly established law and the information [that they] possessed.” … The court held that the professor’s First Amendment rights were clearly established in the Fourth Circuit, and it denied qualified immunity.

Christopher Prosser v. Davis Ross CO,I

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 1, 1995

Ross is entitled to qualified immunity unless he violated Prosser's "clearly established" constitutional rights. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982); Johnson v. Boreani, 946 F.2d 67, 69 (8th Cir. 1991). … Prosser asserts that the situation posed no danger to Ross and that therefore the decision not to intervene violated his clearly established rights.

Jimenez v. Wood County, Tex.

621 F.3d 372 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 22, 2010

III The County argues next that Sheriff Daugherty was entitled to qualified immunity from § 1983 liability because he did not violate a clearly established right. … In its reply brief, the County cannot point to any instance in which it argued that Daugherty was, as a matter of law, entitled to qualified immunity because Ms. Jimenez’s rights were not clearly established.

Rafael Mazuz v. The State of Maryland Philip P. Tou

442 F.3d 217 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Mar 29, 2006

Tou further argued that he is entitled to qualified immunity on the § 1983 cause of action because the law was not clearly established in 2002 that his actions violated the Fourth Amendment and because he acted in good faith … As I say, no issue of qualified immunity here really, because it is well established that one doesn’t enter into a premises where one doesn’t have a warrant.

Terry Caskey v. Nathan Fenton

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 16, 2022

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are shielded from civil liability unless their conduct violates clearly established constitutional rights. Harlow v. … subject to qualified immunity protections.

Forsyth v. Kleindienst

599 F.2d 1203 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 22, 1979

If he can establish that the law was unsettled, and that he acted without malice, he will prevail on his claim of qualified immunity. See Wood v. … 'They do not claim a common law immunity 'from suit. Indeed, they concede the well established rule that federal law enforcement officers are entitled only to qualified, or good faith, immunity.

Virgil Vaduva v. City of Xenia

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 7, 2019

And second, “is the right clearly established?” Id. (quotation omitted). … Hickman County, 700 F.3d 845, 853 (6th Cir. 2013) (“The doctrine [of qualified immunity] focuses on ‘the objective reasonableness of an official’s conduct, as measured by reference to clearly established law’ . . . .”).

Parkinson v. Cozzolino

238 F.3d 145 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 4, 2001

as evidence during the pen-dency of trial is clearly an administrative function of prosecutors for which absolute immunity does not lie.” … In such circumstances, there clearly is no advocacy to be performed.

Michael Scott v. Marco Glumac

3 F.3d 163 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 6, 1993

Qualified immunity shields police officers “from suit for damages if ‘a reasonable officer could have believed [the action] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the officers possessed.’ ” … For the purposes of qualified immunity, uncertainty in the law protects as well as law that clearly authorizes the officer’s action.

Edward Nero v. Marilyn Mosby

890 F.3d 106 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 7, 2018

Forsyth , 472 U.S. 511 , 530, 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) (federal qualified immunity); Nixon , 457 U.S. at 742 , 102 S.Ct. 2690 (federal absolute immunity). … The statute clearly states that MTCA immunity is an "immunity from suit." Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-522 (b).