Case law

Torres-Rivera v. O'Neill-Cancel

406 F.3d 43 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · May 3, 2005

Qualified Immunity O'Neill argues that the trial court erred by denying him qualified immunity from the failure to intervene claim. … O'Neill is not entitled to qualified immunity because the law was clearly established in 1998 that an officer in O'Neill's circumstances had a duty to intervene. D.

Derrick Davis v. City of Little Rock

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 3, 2024

“A public official is entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the official violated a statutory or constitutional right and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” Adams v. … Detectives Bell and Ison are entitled to qualified immunity as to the execution of the no-knock warrant. B.

Melo v. Hafer

13 F.3d 736 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 15, 1994

immunity, absolute prosecutorial immunity, and qualified official immunity. … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 , 107 S.Ct. 3034 , 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987), where Anderson, an FBI agent, claimed qualified official immunity from damage liability on an alleged constitutional tort: The principles of qualified immunity

James Dorsey v. United States Department of Labor

41 F.3d 1551 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 16, 1994

The federal government’s waiver of sovereign immunity must be “unequivocally expressed” and the statutory provision containing the expression must “establish unambiguously that the waiver extends to monetary claims.” … The three representatives and two senators, rather than expressing themselves clearly on the subject, uttered not a word about relinquishing the government’s immunity from damages.

Sarah Cox v. B. Alan Sugg

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 27, 2007

If the district court instead enters an interlocutory order that ignores a timely claim of qualified immunity, our proper course is to remand with instructions to consider the qualified immunity issue. … Qualified immunity protects “government officials performing discretionary functions . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Darell Chancellor v. Stephen Geelhood

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 25, 2026

“Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Kisela v. … Whatever the wisdom of these opinions, it is certainly not clearly established that an officer could be liable in such circumstances.

Cindy Fils v. City of Aventura

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 28, 2011

The court then revised its rulings on the Defendants’ qualified-immunity defenses. … But, where the officer’s conduct is so outrageous that it clearly goes “so far beyond” these borders, qualified immunity will not protect him even in the absence of case law. Reese v.

Cole v. Ruidoso Municipal Schools

947 F.2d 903 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 29, 1991

On appeal, Defendants argue that the district court erred in denying qualified immunity on Plaintiff's procedural due process claim because New Mexico law did not clearly establish that the failure to renew 1 Plaintiff's … A government official is entitled to immunity from liability if the official's conduct as alleged in the complaint did not violate "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

Wells v. Brown

891 F.2d 591 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 19, 1990

immunity" from damages by violating "clearly established" rights protected by the Due Process Clause. 2 The Supreme Court's recent decision in Will v. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), the Supreme Court predicted that qualified immunity would "permit the resolution of many insubstantial claims on summary judgment."

Harris Ex Rel. Harris v. Robinson

273 F.3d 927 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 7, 2001

Robinson would still be entitled to qualified immunity. In determining claims of qualified immunity, we first determine whether “the defendant’s actions violated a constitutional or statutory right.” Albright v. … Robinson is entitled to qualified immunity because she did not violate a clearly established law of which a reasonable teacher should have known.

Bird v. Regents of New Mexico State University

619 F. App'x 733 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 6, 2015

“The qualified immunity doctrine shields government officials from individual liability ‘for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s unlawful conduct.”

Winterrowd v. Nelson

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 30, 2007

Because we held in Meredith that the law on this point was clearly established as of July 10, 1998, it was also clearly established for the later incident here. … of qualified immunity.

Agosto v. New York City Department of Education

982 F.3d 86 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 4, 2020

Qualified immunity precludes individual liability when “reasonably competent” officials could disagree about whether the conduct at issue would violate a clearly established right. Cartier v. … To overcome qualified immunity, the alleged right must have been clearly established by Second Circuit or Supreme Court precedent at the time of the allegedly illegal action, Montero, 890 F.3d at 402, but Agosto has pointed

Hegarty v. Wright

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · May 19, 1995

The Qualified Immunity Doctrine 2. … damages are entitled to qualified immunity from suit in civil rights actions under 10 10 section 1983, provided their conduct did "not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reason- able

Currie v. United States

836 F.2d 209 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 28, 1987

Since the therapists in this case were clearly competent, indeed, highly qualified, and acted in entire good faith, the district judge entered judgment for the United States. 644 F.Supp. 1074 (M.D.N.C.1986). … Established doctrine would permit recovery for negligence in the release of a previously committed person known to be dangerous, but the legislature provided qualified immunity even in that situation; m this case, the plaintiff

Michael Toney v. Rissie Owens

779 F.3d 330 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 26, 2015

“The two-part inquiry into qualified immunity is first ‘whether a constitutional right would have been violated on the facts alleged,’ and second ‘whether the right was clearly established’ at the time of violation.’” … Accordingly, because Toney has not established a violation of his constitutional rights, the district court correctly granted qualified immunity to Appellees sued in their individual capacities.

Moorer v. Price

83 F. App'x 770 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 9, 2003

The court evaluates qualified immunity claims using a three-part inquiry. … If the plaintiffs allegations do not establish a constitutional violation, then it is not necessary for the court to make any further inquiries with respect to qualified immunity. Saucier v.

Mayfield v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice

529 F.3d 599 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 30, 2008

The district court held that both sovereign and qualified immunity prevented Mayfield from pursuing his claims. … First, we consider the district court’s conclusions as to sovereign and qualified immunity.

Gold v. City of Miami

138 F.3d 886 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 7, 1998

Disregarding these applicable precedents, the court’s opinion found that Gold had not shown a violation of clearly established law, effectively holding that the law in a particular area is not clearly established for qualified … Comparing the “clearly established” concept in qualified immunity to the “fair warning” standard for a conviction under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242, the Court observed: In the civil sphere, we have - explained that qualified

Rodgers v. Singletary

142 F.3d 1252 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 2, 1998

Jenkins, however, was a qualified immunity case. … issue in analyzing whether a defendant should have known that he was violating a clearly established right.