Case law

Vidro v. United States

720 F.3d 148 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 21, 2013

Id. at 1509. 21 Based on Gallo, 935 A.2d 103, in which the Connecticut Supreme 22 Court found that witness statements to an investigating police 23 officer received only qualified immunity, Vidro argues that … Ellis, 510 A.2d 1337, 1341-42 (Conn. 1986) (noting that 5 police officers sued for false arrests or “complaining witnesses” 6 who initiate prosecutions are entitled only to qualified immunity). 7 Accordingly,

Tenenbaum v. Williams

193 F.3d 581 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 13, 1999

for such actions because the law is not "clearly established." … Whatever van Emrik "clearly established" therefore could not have guided the behavior of the individual defendants here and they are entitled to qualified immunity, as the district court held. IV.

Bergquist v. County of Cochise

806 F.2d 1364 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 23, 1986

Briggs in no way alters the substantive law governing searches, it merely establishes that the qualified immunity from damage suits is no broader than the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule. … Because we have reversed the district court’s judgment on the officers’ qualified immunity, we must also vacate its decision on the supervisors’ liability.

Russell v. Selsky

35 F.3d 55 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 7, 1994

Second, none of these cases are Second Circuit or Supreme Court cases that would impact decisively upon the qualified immunity question presented by the instant case. … that would deprive McGinnis of qualified immunity.

Wadkins v. Arnold

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 2, 2000

Detective Arnold moved for summary judgment, asserting qualified immunity. … Second, even if the arrest of Wadkins violated a clearly established constitutional right, Detective Arnold maintains that he is nevertheless entitled to qualified immunity because he acted reasonably; that is, a reasonable

Sportique Fashions, Inc. v. Sullivan

597 F.2d 664 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 21, 1979

Finally, appellants’ failure to show that defendants were negligent means that defendants clearly fall under the immunity rule for public officials. … Defendants Lawrence and Bennett, as representatives and employees of an agency of the United States, the Postal Service, have at least a qualified immunity for their acts. 3 The qualified immunity rule protects such officials

Resek v. City of Huntington Beach

41 F. App'x 57 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 1, 2002

Wersching next argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields 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 would have known

Taylor v. Ponca City

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 30, 1997

Chief Ham objects to the district court having ordered him to submit to discovery before ruling on his qualified immunity defense. … Losavio, 847 F.2d 642, 646 (10th Cir. 1988) (holding that, to overcome a qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must “show both that the defendant’s alleged conduct violated the law and that the law was clearly established

Neaves v. City of San Diego

70 F. App'x 428 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 27, 2003

The grant of summary judgment was based on defendants’ qualified immunity. … We affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment against Makenzie’s claim of unlawful seizure on the basis of qualified immunity.

Early v. Southern University & Agricultural & Mechanical College Board of Supervisors

252 F. App'x 698 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 31, 2007

Aug 19, 2005), 1 the district court determined that Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on some, but not all, of the claims raised by Early. … Gilliam were entitled to qualified immunity as to Early’s § 1981 retaliation and § 1983 free speech and due process claims; and (3) Defendant Gilliam was entitled to qualified immunity as to Early’s related § 1986 claim.

Pacheco v. Bosworth

32 F. App'x 299 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 1, 2002

Edgington’s alleged conduct violated Pacheco’s clearly established constitutional rights, and whether a reasonable officer could have believed, in light of the clearly established law, that his conduct was lawful. … Edgington to believe, in light of the clearly established law, that his conduct was lawful. See Saucier, 121 S.Ct. at 2155. Det. Edgington is thus entitled to qualified immunity on Pacheco’s false arrest claim.

Carvajal, Raul v. Dominguez, Louis

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 5, 2008

An appeal of an order denying qualified immu- nity is a well-established application of this doctrine: “A district court’s denial of a claim of qualified immunity, to the extent that it turns on an issue of law is an appealable … If not, the inquiry ends, and the officer has qualified immunity. If yes, then the second step is whether the violated right was clearly established.

Key v. Rutherford

645 F.2d 880 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 10, 1981

Thus on January 31, 1979, when the trial court entered judgment on the jury verdict in favor of the City of Stroud, the *883 availability of qualified municipal immunity was an unsettled question. … The Supreme Court then squarely addressed the issue of qualified municipal immunity in Owen, 445 U.S. 673 , 100 S.Ct. 1427 , which was also handed down while the instant case was pending appeal.

Paul Bame v. Todd Dillard

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 29, 2011

Qualified immunity is “a defense that shields officials from suit if their conduct ‘d[id] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” Ortiz v. … Most notably, in deciding whether for purposes of qualified immunity the law was clearly established in 2002, the majority fails to distinguish, as established by Harlow and its progeny, between the role of the court to determine

John Duda v. Board of Education of Franklin Park Public School District No. 84, John Barry, Dan Pietrini

133 F.3d 1054 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 16, 1998

Alabama A & M Univ., Bd. of Trustees, 28 F.3d 1146, 1150 (11th Cir.1994)) (concluding that qualified immunity applied to school superintendent). … To the extent that the allegations are made against the defendants in their personal capacity, they enjoy qualified immunity. The right of privacy asserted by Mr.

Harman v. Pollock

586 F.3d 1254 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 18, 2009

Finally, the court determined the Officers did not violate clearly established law, and that the Officers’ behavior was objectively reasonable, and that the Officers were entitled to qualified immunity. … Standard of Review We review a grant of summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity de novo.

Morfin v. Albuquerque Public Schools

906 F.2d 1434 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 27, 1990

The district court held that some of the conduct was not protected, and that it was not clearly established at the time that the remainder was protected (and therefore, the defendants acted within their qualified immunity … Public officials are protected by qualified immunity. They are immune unless their conduct violates rights which were “ ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.” Anderson v.

Okeson v. Tolley School District No. 25

766 F.2d 378 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 1, 1985

“Whether an official may prevail in his [or her] qualified immunity defense depends upon the ‘objective reasonableness of [his or her] conduct as measured by reference to clearly established law.’ ... … Whether the school board members are entitled to qualified immunity therefore depends only upon the objective reasonableness of their conduct as measured by clearly established law.

John Houston Sellars v. Raymond K. Procunier

641 F.2d 1295 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 9, 1981

Absolute and Qualified Immunity a. … Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity has been accorded to certain state officials for decisions made in the good faith exercise of their official responsibilities.9 10 It has been recognized that some degree of immunity

James Player v. University of Idaho

683 F. App'x 608 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 20, 2017

To the extent that Player sued any defendant in his individual capacity, the claims are barred by qualified immunity. See Pearson v. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (“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