Case law

Joseph Zadeh v. Mari Robinson

902 F.3d 483 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 31, 2018

Requirement of clearly established law for qualified immunity We have concluded that there was a violation of Dr. Zadeh’s constitutional rights. … But owing to a legal deus ex machina—the “clearly established law” prong of qualified-immunity analysis—the violation eludes vindication.

Thompson v. Ragland

23 F.4th 1252 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 26, 2022

The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim, holding that Ragland had not violated clearly established law and therefore was entitled to qualified immunity. … We held that the applicable law was clearly established and reversed the district court’s dismissal on qualified-immunity grounds. See id. at 1238–39.

Rojas v. Anderson

727 F.3d 1000 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 9, 2013

See Martinez, 479 F.3d at 1295 (“[T]he record must clearly demonstrate the plaintiff has satisfied his heavy two-part burden; otherwise, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.” … Nor does it discuss whether Plaintiff’s right to be free from such force was clearly established. Again, without any such argument, Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity.

Williams v. Borrego

5 F.4th 1129 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 21, 2021

Williams has overcome qualified immunity. To overcome the defendants’ assertion of qualified immunity, Mr. … Williams has adequately alleged the violation of a clearly established constitutional right, he has overcome qualified immunity.

Tammy Cass v. City of Abilene

814 F.3d 721 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 24, 2016

Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability in their individual capacity to the extent that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. Trent v. … Appellants’ entire argument on this second prong of the qualified immunity test is that “it is clearly established in the law that citizens are protected against unjustified, excessive police force.”

Jones v. McNeese

675 F.3d 1158 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 29, 2012

McNeese’s various arguments, we conclude he principally challenges the district court’s application of qualified immunity principles to the established summary judgment facts. … ; and (2) [whether] the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.”

Dahn v. Amedei

867 F.3d 1178 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 14, 2017

We apply a special standard of review when defendants assert a qualified- immunity defense. See Koch v. … “Qualified immunity protects governmental officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

Cory D. Chan, Cross-Appellee v. Edward S. Wodnicki, Individually and in His Former Capacity as Deputy Superintendent of the Chicago Police Department

123 F.3d 1005 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 29, 1997

It held that he was *1008 entitled to qualified immunity because, at the time of Officer Chan’s transfer, it was not clearly established that the transfer constituted a burden sufficiently grave to constitute an infringement … The official is entitled to this immunity if, at the time he acted, he reasonably could have determined that his actions did not violate clearly established law. See Anderson v.

Rodney Brown v. Matthew T. Boettigheimer

40 F.4th 895 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 27, 2022

Beringer, we expressly stated that the issue of arguable probable cause is properly part of the resolution of qualified immunity’s second prong, the clearly established prong. … Notably, the Supreme Court has also treated the doctrines of actual probable cause and arguable probable cause as pertaining to the qualified immunity analysis this way, finding that the law was not clearly established and

Christian Longoria v. Pinal County

873 F.3d 699 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 10, 2017

Clearly Established Right We next proceed to the second question in assessing qualified immunity: whether the right at issue was clearly established. … Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity because there is a material issue of fact as to whether Rankin violated Longoria’s clearly established constitutional right.

Richard Feliciano-Angulo v. Hon. Hector Rivera-Cruz, Etc.

858 F.2d 40 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Sep 30, 1988

Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532 , 105 S.Ct. 1487 , 84 L.Ed.2d 494 (1985), and that, because he violated no clearly established law, he is entitled to qualified immunity. … As both the law and the uncontroverted facts fail to indicate that defendant Rivera Cruz violated clearly established law regarding the due process procedures owing to plaintiff, Rivera Cruz is clearly entitled to qualified

Flores v. Henderson

101 F.4th 1185 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 14, 2024

The district court denied the officers’ motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, concluding Officer Henderson recklessly created the need to use deadly force in violation of clearly established law, … Jackson’s Fourth Amendment rights under clearly established law and are entitled to qualified immunity.

Berg v. Kelly

897 F.3d 99 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 25, 2018

Qualified immunity protects officers from suit so long as "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v. … In sum, in the absence of clearly established law prohibiting the challenged detentions in the circumstances presented, the Officers are entitled to qualified immunity.

Stuart Wright v. Sean Franklin

813 F.3d 689 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 23, 2015

Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability and the burdens of litigation unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would … “Whether an asserted federal right was clearly established at a particular time, so that a public official who allegedly violated the right has no qualified immunity from suit, presents a question of law, not one of ‘legal

Heidi Baker Evan Baker, a Minor by and Through His Guardian Ad Litem, Heidi Baker v. I.G. Racansky Mavis Knox

887 F.2d 183 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 26, 1989

“Government officials performing discretionary functions enjoy *186 qualified immunity from civil damages so long as their conduct does not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … CONCLUSION We reverse the district court’s order denying Racansky’s and Knox’s motion for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. The socialworkers’ alleged conduct did not violate clearly established law.

Blueford v. Prunty

108 F.3d 251 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 6, 1997

This court applies a two-part test to an asserted qualified immunity defense: The first question is whether the right at issue is clearly established and stated with particularity_ The second question is .whether the official … (finding no qualified immunity where cases “clearly” set out the premises of a particular clearly established right).

Austin Gates v. Hassan Khokar

884 F.3d 1290 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 13, 2018

Ct. 1765, 1775–76 (2015) (overruling the denial of qualified immunity and explaining that “[q]ualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined as the right to be free from unreasonable … The first question addressed in a qualified immunity analysis is whether the right was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged violation.

Tuttle v. Sepolio

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 24, 2023

Federal qualified immunity does not apply to state-law claims, see Brown v. … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985) (“Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement

Tuttle v. Sepolio

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 24, 2023

Federal qualified immunity does not apply to state-law claims, see Brown v. … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985) (“Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement

Sisney v. Reisch

674 F.3d 839 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 19, 2012

We think it is clear the district court granted qualified immunity because it found Sisney had failed to allege violation of a constitutional right that was clearly established. … setting is a clearly established right.”