Case law

Batten v. Gomez

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 24, 2003

suit under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … We have reviewed this claim and agree with the dis- trict court that Shuster and Gomez are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim because Shuster and Gomez violated no clearly established right held by Brittany.

Flores v. Morgan Hill Unified School District

18 F. App'x 646 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 10, 2001

. *648 Defendants contend that they are entitled to immunity from suit because, at the time of the alleged harassment, the law was not clearly established that the students were entitled under the Equal Protection Clause … The defendants further contend that even if the law were clearly established, the administrators’ actions were objectively reasonable.

Paul C. Murray v. Theodore M. Gardner, Special Agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation

741 F.2d 434 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 14, 1984

Under the Harlow standard for official immunity, if "the law was not clearly established at the time the contested conduct occurred, the inquiry ceases.” Zweibon v. Mitchell, 720 F.2d 162, 168 (D.C.Cir.1983). … The essence of qualified immunity is the necessity of protecting government officials from charges that they knowingly violated standards that were in fact unknowable.

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.

No. 98-3389

177 F.3d 1071 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 3, 1999

Trilogy Communications, Inc., 143 F.3d 1160, 1163-64 (8th Cir.1998). 12 Officials are entitled to qualified immunity only to the extent that "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Due Process Claim 13 Hedges had clearly established due process rights.

Couture Ex Rel. M.C. v. Board of Education of the Albuquerque Public Schools

535 F.3d 1243 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 7, 2008

Willis moved for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. … Brady violated M.C.’s clearly established rights when she seized him and placed him in a “closet-like” timeout room without proper procedures.

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.”

Eileen Buchholz v. George Aldaya

210 F.3d 862 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 7, 2000

They are entitled to qualified immunity from Buchholz’s damage claims unless her termination “violate[d] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … The ultimate qualified immunity question is whether these ASCS defendants violated clearly established constitutional law by limiting Buchholz to the procedures 2 If the termination is based on both performance

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.

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.

Farid M. Sayyed v. Wolpoff & Abramson

485 F.3d 226 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 9, 2007

This provision offers a kind of qualified immunity to debt collectors, protecting actions which otherwise are covered by the statute but arose from bona fide error and were not intentional violations. … The statutory framework establishes that the proper place for the inquiry is not at the Rule 12(b)(6) stage. 2 IV.

Erwine v. Westbrook

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 11, 2026

Those who act while clad in its armor cannot be held liable for damages under any circumstances, even if they violate clearly established federal rights, and even if they do so intentionally or maliciously.” Brooks v. … V The last ground urged for affirmance is qualified immunity. The district court did not reach the Tribal Officers’ qualified immunity defenses.

Palllottino v. City Of Rio Rancho

31 F.3d 1023 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 4, 1994

The doctrine of qualified immunity gives the Officers qualified immunity in a Sec. 1983 suit unless they violate "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … Once a defendant to a Sec. 1983 action raises a qualified immunity defense, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show both facts and law to establish that the defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity.

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.

Huckaby v. Priest

636 F.3d 211 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 5, 2011

The district court denied Defendant officers’ motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity because it identified a number of disputed material facts which made qualified immunity inappropriate. … This is not the purpose of appellate review on qualified immunity claims, and we will not do it here concerning either Pierce or Huckaby.

Kevin Lackey v. L.T. Hurley

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 9, 2026

Officers are entitled to qualified immunity at summary judgment “when, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the challenged conduct did not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which … To overcome a qualified-immunity defense at the summary-judgment stage, Lackey must show that (1) the officers “violated his constitutional rights, and (2) at the time of the violation, it was clearly established that the

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.' ... … "If the law was clearly established," then, according to Harlow 457 U.S. at 818-19 , 102 S.Ct. at 2738-39 , "the [qualified] immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know

Ali v. Howard

353 F. App'x 667 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 16, 2009

Qualified immunity shields these defendants in their individual capacities from damages suits so long as their conduct does “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … We agree, based on the discussion above, that the state defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because them conduct did not rise to constitutional violations. See Pearson v.

Allah v. Juchenwioz

176 F. App'x 187 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 12, 2006

which the Court found to exist in its 1999 decision was not clearly established at the relevant time.” … “In general, public officials are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe their acts did not

Robbins v. United States Bureau of Land Management

438 F.3d 1074 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 23, 2006

The BLM, in turn, renews its claim of sovereign immunity. 3 DISCUSSION I. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY The BLM’s sovereign immunity defense “is jurisdictional in nature.” … Robbins asserts that the Settlement Agreement itself qualifies as a protected property interest.