Case law

Municipal Utilities Bd. of Albertville v. Alabama Power Co.

934 F.2d 1493 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 5, 1991

The Cities contend that the defendants' actions do not qualify for state action immunity for two reasons. … We therefore cannot determine whether the private agreements qualify for state action immunity.

McSherry v. City of Long Beach

423 F.3d 1015 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 8, 2005

Pre-trial dismissal on qualified immunity grounds is inappropriate if the plaintiff establishes that material issues of fact exist. LaLonde v. … "[T]here is a clearly established constitutional due process right not to be subjected to criminal charges on the basis of false evidence that was deliberately fabricated by the government."

Sinclair v. City Of Des Moines

268 F.3d 594 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 11, 2001

violated any of Clark's established rights; therefore, the officers were entitled to qualified immunity. … Summary judgment was granted to the City because summary judgment had been granted to the officers. 6 The district court properly granted summary judgment to the officers after considering the qualified immunity question:

Salvador v. Adirondack Park Agency

35 F. App'x 7 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 26, 2002

Qualified Immunity We turn now to the claims against the individual defendants in their individual capacities. … “A government actor performing a discretionary task is entitled to [qualified] immunity from § 1983 suits if either (a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable

Anthony Reed v. Doug Lieurance

863 F.3d 1196 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 24, 2017

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … The Court also notes that even if Deputy Lieurance were entitled to qualified immunity on Reed’s Fourth Amendment claim, Montana courts do not afford defendants qualified immunity for claimed state constitutional violations

Billy Darlene Jackson, Also Known as Billy Darlene Kimbrough v. A. L. Lockhart, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction

7 F.3d 1391 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 2, 1993

According to Lockhart, Jackson received the constitutional protections required by the clearly established law at the time, so he is entitled to qualified immunity for his actions. We review his claim de novo. … Because the Act 814 participant’s constitutional right to the due process protections of a Morrissey-type hearing was not clearly established at the time Jackson’s 814 status was revoked, Lockhart is entitled to qualified

Paul Gerlich v. Steven Leath

861 F.3d 697 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 13, 2017

A public official is entitled to qualified immunity if his or her conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Mullenix v. … The court denies the Defendants qualified immunity, concluding it was clearly established at the time in question (i) “that ISU’s trademark licensing pro *717 gram was a limited public forum,” (ii) that Defendants engaged

Edgerly v. City and County of San Francisco

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 16, 2007

Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001), police officers are entitled to qualified immunity from § 1983 claims unless (1) their alleged conduct violated a con- stitutional right, and (2) that right was clearly established. … Also, because no reasonable officer could have believed, in light of clearly established law, that the search as described by Edgerly was constitutional, the Officers are not entitled to qualified immunity for the search.

Dennis Anderson v. Gilberto Romero and Arthur Douglas

72 F.3d 518 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 15, 1995

The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint, citing the qualified immunity of public officers from suits for damages. … Taken together with other evidence, they might show that the law had been clearly established.

Nos. 90-1528, 90-1529

932 F.2d 1229 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 8, 1991

for the law to be clearly established. … Anderson, 483 U.S. at 639-40 , 107 S.Ct. at 3038-39 . 22 Nevertheless, when deciding whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, we need only determine whether there was clearly established law which revealed the

Spencer v. Sutterfield

66 F. App'x 569 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 28, 2003

In actions seeking damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , qualified immunity protects a public official from *573 being sued as long as the official “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … , if so, whether that constitutional right was so clearly established that a reasonable official would understand that the particular conduct would violate that right.

Sam Friedenberg v. Lane County

68 F.4th 1113 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 19, 2023

LANE COUNTY center to remove a case when the United States fails to inform the state court whether the FTCA remedy is available. 42 U.S.C. § 233(l)(2) (establishing that if an action qualifying for immunity under § 233 … The statute, however, clearly establishes that procedural objections become ripe when a defendant files the notice of removal.

Barber v. Overton

496 F.3d 449 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 2, 2007

[T]he next, sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly, established.” Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001). … Second, determine whether that right was, at the time the violation occurred, clearly established.

Coleman v. Reed

147 F.3d 751 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 30, 1998

. § 1983 , appeal the district court's denial of their claim of qualified immunity. 2 Because we find that the suit fails to allege that the officials violated a clearly established constitutional right, we reverse. I. … IV. 38 Finally, the majority determined that it need not decide whether the administrators were entitled to qualified immunity because Coleman's suit failed to allege that they had violated a clearly established constitutional

Fogle v. Palomino

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 6, 2017

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity for government officers and employees, Mr. Palomino is protected from financial liability as long as he did not violate clearly established federal law. See Mayfield v. … Bethards, 826 F.3d 1252, 1255 (10th Cir. 2016) (“Qualified immunity protects government officials from suit for civil damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.”).

Larry Charbert Hayes v. James R. Thompson

637 F.2d 483 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 18, 1980

Strickland rule, the immunity defense would be unavailing to [the prison officials] if the constitutional right allegedly infringed by them was clearly established at the time of their challenged conduct, if they knew or … as not clearly erroneous, we conclude that the members of the Committee acted in good faith and are, therefore, immune from money damages.

Texas Ex Rel. Board of Regents of the University of Texas System v. Walker

142 F.3d 813 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 28, 1998

Qualified immunity shields a public official exercising discretionary functions from liability for civil damages unless the public official’s conduct violated clearly established constitutional or … This court reviews a claim of qualified immunity under a two-part analysis. First, it must be determined whether the plaintiff alleged the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2114, 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3975, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 3919 Keith Somers v. Otis Thurman, Warden John Ratelle, Warden C. Lovvorn H. Castango J. Volletti Jesse Miles Unknown Martinez Unk. Booke Unk. Porter Unk. Brown, and Brenda Cash Unk. Walls Unk. Shabazz Unk. Wheat Unk. Gomez Unk. Ferguson Unk. Johnson Unk. Rivera

109 F.3d 614 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 28, 1997

If it was not clearly established, the official is entitled to immunity from suit. (2) If the law was clearly established, we proceed to ask if under that law, a reasonable official could have believed the conduct was lawful … Therefore, an official is denied qualified immunity only if the law was clearly established and a reasonable official could not have believed the conduct was lawful. 9 We are concerned in this case only with the first inquiry

Burdette v. Butte County

121 F. App'x 701 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 28, 2005

We review the district court’s decision to grant summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity de novo. … In ruling on qualified immunity, we must consider whether, “taken in the light most favorable to the party asserting the injury, [] the facts alleged show the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right” that is clearly

Tennison v. Sanders

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 8, 2008

The Inspectors moved for summary judgment on the basis of absolute and qualified immunity. … If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.