Case law

McClure v. Independent School District No. 16

228 F.3d 1205 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 6, 2000

McClure in part but held that the individual board members were entitled to qualified immunity. Both sides appeal. … Qualified Immunity We turn to the district court’s grant of qualified immunity to the individual defendants.

Turner v. Dammon

848 F.2d 440 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 3, 1988

Of course, if the plaintiff fails to allege "a violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery." … The Supreme Court has clearly endorsed this view in the context of qualified immunity: [T]he right to due process of law is quite clearly established by the Due Process Clause, and thus there is a sense in which any action

Pellegrino v. United States

73 F.3d 934 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 10, 1996

In Mitchell , the Court held that qualified immunity is not a mere defense but rather an immunity from suit which would be lost if the case erroneously went to trial; therefore, denial of qualified immunity is an appropriate … A determination of qualified immunity turns “on the resolution of the essentially legal question whether the conduct of which the plaintiff complains violated clearly established law.” Id. at 526 , 105 S.Ct. at 2815 .

Deborah Shaw, Administratrix of the Estate of Sidney Bowen, Deceased Nancy Bowen, Individually, and as Guardian Ad Litem for Kimberly Yvonne Bowen and Lee Frederick Bowen, the Minor Children of Sidney Bowen v. C.I. Stroud, Individually, and Alfred E. Morris, J.M. Smith J.A. McVicker J.H. Parks, in Their Individual Capacities, Deborah Shaw, Administratrix of the Estate of Sidney Bowen, Deceased Nancy Bowen, Individually, and as Guardian Ad Litem for Kimberly Yvonne Bowen and Lee Frederick Bowen, the Minor Children of Sidney Bowen v. Alfred E. Morris C.I. Stroud, J.M. Smith, in Their Individual Capacities, and J.A. McVicker J.H. Parks, in Their Individual Capacities, Deborah Shaw, Administratrix of the Estate of Sidney Bowen, Deceased Nancy Bowen, Individually, and as Guardian Ad Litem for Kimberly Yvonne Bowen and Lee Frederick Bowen, the Minor Children of Sidney Bowen v. C.I. Stroud Alfred E. Morris J.M. Smith, in Their Individual Capacities, Deborah Shaw, Administratrix of the Estate of Sidney Bowen, Deceased Nancy Bowen, Individually, and as Guardian Ad Litem for Kimberly Yvonne Bowen and Lee Frederick Bowen, the Minor Children of Sidney Bowen v. C.I. Stroud, Individually

13 F.3d 791 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 6, 1994

Government officials have qualified immunity for discretionary functions so long as "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … Smith meets the standard for qualified immunity set forth in Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. at 2727 : a reasonable officer, in light of clearly established legal rules, could have believed his conduct was lawful.

Distiso v. Town of Wolcott

352 F. App'x 478 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 5, 2009

The district court then denied the Defendants’ qualified immunity defense, asserting conclusorily that Nicholas’s right to be free from racial discrimination was clearly established, and that a reasonable school official … Therefore, if the facts alleged by the Plaintiff here do not make out violation of a “clearly established” constitutional right, then qualified immunity is available. Id. at 816 ; see also Okin v.

Arnold R. Vasbinder, Cross-Appellee v. Gordon Ambach, Basil Y. Scott, and Richard M. Switzer, Basil Y. Scott and Richard M. Switzer, Cross-Appellants

926 F.2d 1333 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Feb 28, 1991

The court rejected defendants’ qualified immunity defense on the ground that Vasbinder had exercised a clearly-established constitutional right and that an objective employer would have known that retaliation would violate … by the doctrine of qualified immunity.

Seamons v. Snow

206 F.3d 1021 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 20, 2000

Qualified Immunity The district court alternatively found that even if the evidence supported a First Amendment claim, defendant officials were entitled to qualified immunity because “Brian has failed to show any … When the case was last before us, we held that Brian’s complaint stated a claim that defendants violated clearly established law and that they therefore were not entitled to qualified immunity.

Campbell v. Arkansas Department of Correction

155 F.3d 950 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 28, 1998

He contends that the unlawfulness of a retaliatory demotion under such circumstances was clearly established so there can be no qualified immunity on this claim. … media attention, was also clearly established.

Lambert v. Williams

223 F.3d 257 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 7, 2000

established" for purposes of qualified immunity. … ever ruling on the qualified immunity question."); Gordon v.

Bray v. Planned Parenthood Columbia-Willamette Inc.

746 F.3d 229 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 21, 2014

Page 3 clearly established with sufficient specificity. Riley and Kimmet are therefore entitled to qualified immunity from suit. … Nonetheless, the officers are protected from suit by the doctrine of qualified immunity, because these constitutional rights were not clearly established at the time of the violations.2 The defense of qualified immunity applies

Holmes v. Reddoch

117 F.4th 309 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 6, 2024

immunity because he failed to show that Deputy Reddoch violated clearly established law.” … necessarily entitled to qualified immunity for his arrest of Holmes.

ARMAND VILLASANA, JR., — v. WELDON WILHOIT, —

368 F.3d 976 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 1, 2004

The district court 1 granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, concluding they are entitled to qualified immunity. Villasana appeals. We affirm. … After substantial discovery, the district court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment, concluding they are entitled to qualified immunity from these claims.

Rasul v. Myers

512 F.3d 644 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 11, 2008

It then concluded that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity from suit under Bivens because any constitutional right the detainees possessed was not clearly established at the time it was allegedly violated. … entitled to qualified immunity from suit pursuant to Harlow v.

Auriemma v. Rice

895 F.2d 338 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 6, 1990

If it was not clearly established that whites as a class were within the purview of Sec. 1985(3) in 1983, then there is no clearly established constitutional violation. 24 In denying qualified immunity to Rice on this issue … immunity inquiry of whether a constitutional right is clearly established.

Samuel Troice v. Proskauer Rose, L.L.P., et

816 F.3d 341 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 10, 2016

What is more, even defendants asserting qualified immunity often must respond to discovery to help the court resolve factual disputes in order to determine whether they are entitled to qualified immunity. … (“Even if the plaintiff’s complaint adequately alleges the commission of acts that violated clearly established law, the defendant is entitled to summary judgment if discovery fails to uncover evidence sufficient to create

Billington v. Smith

292 F.3d 1177 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 21, 2002

Detective Smith appeals denial of his motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … 7 If not, then “there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.” 8 If so, then “the next, sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established.” 9 A constitutional right is clearly

Delaney, Glen v. DeTella, George

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 9, 2001

Having found that Delaney has alleged a constitutional violation, we consider whether the right he asserts was clearly established prior to the spring of 1996. "’[C]learly established’ for purposes of qualified immunity means … On this record, Judge Coar was right to deny the qualified immunity plea of all defendants.

Velez, David v. Johnson, Michael

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 13, 2005

Johnson appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … Velez has also met the second Saucier requirement that the constitutional right be clearly established.

Charles E. Gunter v. William J. Morrison

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 15, 2007

The question is whether this right was clearly established. … This right was clearly established. See, e.g., Zar v. S.D.

David Beard Theo Downs, as Next Friend of Peggy Shumway Peggy Shumway Edward Gariepy, as Next Friend of Alyssa Chappa Alyssa Chappa Tamara Bleau, as Next Friend of Robert Cook Robert Cook Ronald Ford, Sr., as Next Friend of Ronald Ford, Jr. Ronald Ford, Jr. Nancy Huskinson, as Next Friend of Stacy Huskinson Stacy Huskinson v. Whitmore Lake School District, Charmaine Balsillie Brian Carpenter Jay Munz Wendy Lemons Sue Langen, David Beard Theo Downs, as Next Friend of Peggy Shumway Peggy Shumway Edward Gariepy, as Next Friend of Alyssa Chappa Alyssa Chappa Tamara Bleau, as Next Friend of Robert Cook Robert Cook Ronald Ford, Sr., as Next Friend of Ronald Ford, Jr. Ronald Ford, Jr. Nancy Huskinson, as Next Friend of Stacy Huskinson Stacy Huskinson v. Whitmore Lake School District Charmaine Balsillie Brian Carpenter Jay Munz Wendy Lemons Sue Langen, R. Mayrand, Officer

402 F.3d 598 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 4, 2005

denied the teachers' request for qualified immunity. … Conclusion 39 Because the searches in this case did not violate clearly established law, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. The denial of summary judgment is accordingly REVERSED.