Case law

Ervan Purnell v. Elaine A. Lord, Walter E. Kelly

952 F.2d 679 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 3, 1992

The doctrine of qualified immunity serves to shield public officials, such as these defendants, from liability in § 1983 actions “insofar as their conduct does not *684 violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … established” at the time Purnell’s correspondence privilege was revoked, qualified immunity protects Superintendents Kelly and Lord as a matter of law from liability.

Kinney v. Weaver

301 F.3d 253 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 31, 2002

Not long after Harlow , the Court refined the qualified-immunity standard by defining "clearly established" in a way that encompasses this "objective reasonableness" inquiry: To be "clearly established" for purposes of qualified … The doctrine of qualified immunity assumes that reasonably competent officials know clearly established constitutional or statutory rights.

Bryce v. Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Colorado

289 F.3d 648 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 30, 2002

In this sense, the assertion that the First Amendment precludes the sexual harassment suit is similar to a government official’s defense of qualified immunity, which is frequently asserted in a motion to dismiss under … Qualified immunity “avoid[s] excessive disruption of government and permit[s] the resolution of many insubstantial claims on summary judgment.” Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982).

Javier Torres v. Terry Goddard

793 F.3d 1046 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 16, 2015

But that’s not necessarily true of qualified immunity. That protection depends on “whether the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.” Pearson v. … We express no opinion as to whether Holmes is entitled to qualified immunity.

Eddie Howard v. Ryan Bronner

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 2, 2009

“Qualified immunity protects a government official from liability in a section 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would … to qualified immunity because the alleged constitutional violation was not clearly established at the time of their encounter with Howard.

Kennedy v. City of Ridgefield

411 F.3d 1134 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 23, 2005

of qualified immunity are permissible. … If Shields's conduct did not violate Plaintiff's clearly established constitutional rights, he is entitled to qualified immunity. We now turn to those questions. 29 B.

Maust v. Headley

959 F.2d 644 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 26, 1992

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials performing discretionary functions are protected from civil liability when their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … If there are issues of disputed fact upon which the question of immunity turns, or if it is clear that the defendant’s conduct violated clearly established norms, summary judgment may not may granted. Green v.

Rebecca Lewis, Brenda Heath v. David McDade Individually and in His Official Capacity as District Attorney

250 F.3d 1320 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 21, 2001

Lanier, 520 U.S. 259, 267, 269 , 117 S.Ct. 1219 , 137 L.Ed.2d 432 (1997). 8 In Anderson, the Supreme Court held that for a right to be clearly established such that a defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity, "[t]he … The Cross Court found this conduct to be in violation of clearly established. The clearly established law upon which it relied was the 1979 Supreme Court case of Davis v.

Alvaro L. Hernandez, Jr. v. W.J. Estelle, Jr., Director, Texas Department of Corrections

788 F.2d 1154 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 9, 1986

immunity. … Under their qualified immunity, therefore, they were entitled to a judgment finding no liability in damages for failure to narrow the scope of censorship by clipping the banned items.

Hale v. Townley

19 F.3d 1068 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 3, 1994

If disputed factual issues material to qualified immunity are present, the district court's denial of summary judgment sought on the basis of qualified immunity is not appealable. Feagley v. … Qualified immunity shields law enforcement officials from suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 if they could have reasonably believed their actions to be lawful, in light of the law "clearly established" at the time of their actions

Zinker v. Doty

907 F.2d 357 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 29, 1990

were not clearly established in July of 1984. … immunity where officials operate in an area in which the law has not been charted clearly.

Twylla Mae Turney v. Russell Waterbury

375 F.3d 756 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 19, 2004

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

Mink v. Suthers

482 F.3d 1244 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 16, 2007

to allow police officers only qualified immunity for following [that] advice.” … cases to the criminal libel statute was not clearly established under the circumstances here.

Melanie Lydia Dacosta v. Stanislaus Nwachukwa

304 F.3d 1045 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 18, 2002

. § 1983, on the basis of qualified immunity. … Hence, the district court erred in denying Appellant qualified immunity.

Heather Ewing v. City of Stockton

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 9, 2009

The Ewings do not establish that the unlawfulness of charging Heather with mur- der on the facts in question was clearly established. See Hope v. … [19] The Supreme Court has clearly stated that with respect to advising police, prosecutors are entitled to qualified not absolute immunity. Burns, 500 U.S. at 492-95.

Wendy Cockrun v. Berrien Cnty., Mich.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 15, 2024

We concluded that defendants failed to argue that the rights at issue were not clearly established and therefore forfeited the defense. Id. And in Watkins v. … of qualified immunity.”

Cole v. Ruidoso Municipal Schools

43 F.3d 1373 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 29, 1994

" in cases where the legal norms the officials are alleged to have violated were not clearly established at the time. … However, when qualified immunity is raised as a defense, there is a narrow right to discovery limited to the issue of qualified immunity. Maxey v. Fulton, 890 F.2d 279 , 282 (10th Cir.1989).

McMILLIAN v. JOHNSON

88 F.3d 1554 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 3, 1996

The issue for qualified immunity purposes, however, is not whether the due process right not to be punished before conviction was clearly established. … Clearly Established Law Prohibited Police Suppression of Exculpatory and Impeachment Evidence 64 Tate, Ikner, and Benson are protected by qualified immunity unless their actions violated clearly established law.

Rowe v. Lamb

130 F.3d 812 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 15, 1998

Lamb and Ellinger filed a motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … DISCUSSION 5 In an appeal from the denial of a motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, we review the legal issue of the existence of qualified immunity de novo. See Sisneros v.

The Antelope

23 U.S. 66 · Supreme Court of the United States · Mar 15, 1825