Case law

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

Andrews v. City of West Branch, Iowa

454 F.3d 914 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 27, 2006

Qualified immunity is applicable if Knight can show that a reasonable officer with the information he possessed at the time of the shooting could have believed that his conduct was lawful in light of the law that was clearly … A right is clearly established if a "reasonable [officer] would understand that what he is doing violates that right." Id. at 640 , 107 S.Ct. 3034 .

Mills v. City of Barbourville

389 F.3d 568 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 12, 2004

The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … of probable cause is unreasonable, qualified immunity is not appropriate.

Ward v. Day

107 F. App'x 727 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 21, 2004

As to the additional question whether the law was clearly established as to these defendants, which would defeat qualified immunity, we agree with the district court that a jury here should decide whether a reasonable officer … Under the circumstances of this case, because relevant factual issues were raised, a summary judgment granting qualified immunity to defendants was not warranted. See Saucier v.

Shawn Northrup v. City of Toledo Police Dep't

785 F.3d 1128 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 13, 2015

Qualified immunity protects the officers from this lawsuit if either of two things is true: The officers did not violate Northrup’s Fourth Amendment rights, or any such rights were not clearly established at the time of the … Unlike Officer Bright, Sergeant Ray is entitled to qualified immunity.

Charfauros v. Board of Elections

249 F.3d 941 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 6, 2001

We disagree. 27 Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity when "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … To defeat the Board's claim of qualified immunity, Appellees must establish that (1) the alleged conduct set out a constitutional violation and (2) the constitutional standard was clearly established at the time in question

Eddie Bradley v. Village of University Park, Illinois

59 F.4th 887 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 3, 2023

For purposes of her qual- ified immunity defense, the issue is whether her actions vio- lated clearly established constitutional law. … qualified immunity. See generally Wilson v.

Mohamed Seif v. Cassandra Tarver-Ross

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 7, 2024

And she argued that even if Seif did, she was entitled to qualified immunity because Seif could not show that she violated clearly established law. Seif responded that our decision in Barnes v. … A plaintiff shows the immunity doesn’t apply by establishing (1) “the defendant violated a consti- tutional right” and (2) “the right was ‘clearly established.’” Davis v.

B. David Ridpath v. Board of Governors Marshall University Dan Angel F. Layton Cottrill K. Edward Grose, and Bob Pruett Richard Hilliard, B. David Ridpath v. Bob Pruett, and Board of Governors Marshall University Dan Angel F. Layton Cottrill K. Edward Grose Richard Hilliard

447 F.3d 292 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 11, 2006

the qualified immunity test, we assess whether the free speech claims would contravene clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … on a clearly established First Amendment right.

James v. Grand Lake Mental Health Center, Inc.

161 F.3d 17 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 24, 1998

James was not contrary to "clearly established law." In a separate order, the district court dismissed Ms. James' claim against Dr. Southern, finding he was entitled to qualified immunity. … Southern's actions were not a violation of clearly established law. 43 As discussed above, a public official is entitled to qualified immunity if his actions did not "violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Ryohei Akima v. Caitlyn Peca

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 26, 2023

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials from suit where “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … An official’s qualified immunity defense is analyzed under a two-prong framework, asking whether the official violated a constitutional right, and, if so, whether the right was “clearly established at the time.” D.C. v.

Charles Cullor v. John Baldwin

830 F.3d 830 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 1, 2016

Deol are entitled to qualified immunity, we evaluate (1) whether the facts alleged, construed in the light most favorable to [Cullor], establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and ( … 2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation, such that a reasonable official would have known that her actions were unlawful.

Vince Ford v. Jay Gruwell, Vernon Poage, David Thompson, James Arnold, and Roy Martin

961 F.2d 219 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 7, 1992

Runner, 854 F.2d 374, 377 (10th Cir.1988), we spoke as follows: 10 Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that protects government officials from personal liability unless their actions violate clearly established law … and such clearly established law

Wilson v. Aquino

233 F. App'x 73 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 24, 2007

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity shields police officers acting in their official capacity from suits for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , unless their actions violate clearly-established rights of which an objectively … It has long been clearly established that strip searches require particular justification. See Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. at 559 , 99 S.Ct. 1861 ; Weber v. Dell, 804 F.2d 796 .

Swan v. United States

32 F. App'x 315 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 4, 2002

The test for determining whether an official can be shielded by qualified immunity is two-fold. … Accordingly, Young Miller’s conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person could have known” and she is protected from liability for civil damages by qualified

Laidley v. McClain

914 F.2d 1386 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 13, 1990

Qualified Immunity. The district court declined to rule on the question of qualified immunity. … Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from suit insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Leonard R. Milstein v. Stephen L. Cooley Robert B. Foltz Countyof Los Angeles, Opinion

257 F.3d 1004 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 20, 2001

The Supreme Court has established several principles for analyzing a prosecutor’s claim of absolute immunity. … (“A prosecutor may only shield his investigative work with qualified immunity.”).

Tiffany Williams v. Board of Regents

477 F.3d 1282 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 9, 2007

“Qualified immunity shields governmental officials executing discretionary responsibilities from civil damages ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … If a defendant asserts a qualified immunity defense in a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, the court should grant qualified immunity if the plaintiff’s complaint fails to allege a violation of a clearly established constitutional

A.D. Bedell Wholesale Company, Inc. v. Philip Morris Incorporated

263 F.3d 239 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 11, 2001

Midcal 63 To qualify as state action under the Midcal test, "the challenged restraint must be one 'clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed as state policy.'" 445 U.S. at 104 (quoting City of Lafayette v. La. … Under Noerr-Pennington immunity, the government actions which flow from valid petitioning need not qualify as Parker "state action."

Elsie Y. Byrd v. William E. Byrd

657 F.2d 615 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 25, 1981

There can be no federal right unless the claimant can qualify as a beneficiary under the statute. … The latter, of course, was clearly a matter of state concern. 15 .