Case law

Patrick Barrett v. Steubenville City Schools

388 F.3d 967 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 15, 2004

Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does "not violate clearly established statutory or … In accordance with these fundamental principles of law, Lucci cannot obtain qualified immunity by claiming that no clearly established right existed. III.

John Carter v. James Galloway

352 F.3d 1346 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 15, 2003

The district court also addressed Defendants’ qualified immunity defense. Because Plaintiff’s deliberate indifference claim fails, Defendants have no need for qualified immunity. … If Plaintiff has stated a good deliberate indifference claim, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for the law was not clearly established in Plaintiff’s favor. 10

Reynolds v. Anchorage

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 9, 2004

It cannot be said that at that time it not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional was clearly established that Reynolds had a constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … As immune unless his actions violated clearly established law.”).

Lynn Lerwill and Penny Lerwill v. Gary James Joslin

712 F.2d 435 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 11, 1983

in federal court, as would be the case if prosecutors had only qualified immunity. … Thus, to grant a reasonably circumscribed absolute immunity differs from applying an objective qualified immunity.

Giraldo v. Kessler

694 F.3d 161 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 14, 2012

“[Ajetions taken as an investigator enjoy only qualified immunity.” Zahrey v. Coffey, 221 F.3d 342, 346 (2d Cir.2000). … for an arrest on the qualified immunity side.”

Mendenhall v. Riser

213 F.3d 226 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 21, 2000

Qualified immunity protects against novel theories of statutory or Constitutional injury-any purported harm must stem from rights clearly established under law at the time of the incident, and the contours of that right must … When an individual asserts a claim for wrongful arrest, qualified immunity will shield the defendant officers from suit if "`a reasonable officer could have believed [the arrest at issue] to be lawful, in light of clearly

Tony A. Hadley v. Mike G. Fisher, Uspo M.G. Cisneros, Detective, Dpd

37 F.3d 1509 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 14, 1994

and not just from judgment, "[o]nce a defendant raises the defense of qualified immunity, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the defendant has violated clearly established law." … Hadley has also failed to establish that Detective Cisneros violated clearly established law.

Barbara A. Carbino, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs

168 F.3d 32 · Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · Feb 12, 1999

In Elder , the Court held that “appellate review of qualified immunity dispositions is to be conducted in light of all relevant precedents, not simply those cited to, or discovered by, the district court.” … Scherer, 468 U.S. 183 , 104 S.Ct. 3012 , 82 L.Ed.2d 139 (1984) (“to defeat qualified immunity, the federal right on which the claim for relief is based ... must be clearly established”) in reaching its holding that cases

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.

John Ellins v. City of Sierra Madre

710 F.3d 1049 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 22, 2013

To determine whether a government official is entitled to qualified immunity, we ask two questions: whether the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and whether that right was clearly established at the … It is true that if Diaz “could ... have reasonably but mistakenly believed that ... her conduct did not violate a clearly established constitutional right, [s]he is entitled to qualified immunity.” Hunt v.

Shipman, Karen Y. v. Hamilton, Eric

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 1, 2008

Qualified immunity shields governmental actors per- forming discretionary functions from suit “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … “If the right was clearly established, the officer is not entitled to qualified immunity.” Washing- ton, 481 F.3d at 547 (emphasis in original).

Luz Gonzalez v. Lee County Housing Authority

161 F.3d 1290 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 2, 1998

(en banc), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 118 S.Ct. 412 , 139 L.Ed.2d 315 (1997) (explaining that decisions from only these courts clearly establish the law for the purposes of qualified immunity). … immunity, but this entirely discrete question: Is qualified immunity defeated where a defendant violates any clearly established duty, including one under state law, or must the clearly established right be the federal right

Vance v. Nunnery,et al

137 F.3d 270 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 16, 1998

After discovery, Nunnery moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. The district court denied this motion. … established law.

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.

Stacey Morrell, Individually and as Next Friend for Joshua Morrell, an Infant v. Philip Mock

270 F.3d 1090 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 1, 2001

No Clearly Established Law We turn next to the second part of the analysis of the defendants’ claim of qualified immunity: whether clearly established law prohibited the defendants’ conduct. … We conclude, therefore, that all defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Zar v. South Dakota Board of Examiners of Psychologists

976 F.2d 459 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 9, 1992

Qualified immunity precludes liability of an official for constitutional violations if the conduct “ ‘was objectively reasonable as measured by clearly established law.’ ” Powell v. … “A necessary concomitant to the determination of whether the constitutional right asserted by plaintiff is ‘clearly established’ at the time the defendant acted is the determination of whether the plaintiff asserted a violation

Youth 71five Ministries v. Williams

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 18, 2025

The panel affirmed the district court’s dismissal of 71Five’s claims for damages because 71Five did not allege any violation of a clearly established right, and therefore defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. … Because 71Five does not allege any violation of a clearly established right, we also hold that the Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity and affirm the dismissal of 71Five’s claims for damages.

Anderson v. Ohio State University

26 F. App'x 412 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 5, 2001

The district court properly determined that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. Yates v. City of Cleveland, 941 F.2d 444, 446 (6th Cir.1991). … In general, government officials are entitled to qualified immunity when performing discretionary functions as long as the conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Ward v. Gates

52 F. App'x 341 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 26, 2002

immunity against money damages unless a reasonable officer would have known that they violated clearly established law. … Qualified immunity “requires a two-part analysis: 1) Was the law governing the official’s conduct clearly established? 2) Under that law, could a reasonable officer have believed the conduct was lawful?” Act Up!

Forte v. Rosenfeld

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Oct 19, 1992

We begin with qualified immunity. III. … Id. ___ "Only where the action in question was clearly unlawful does _______ a defendant lose his qualified immunity."