Case law

William Rainsberger v. Charles Benner

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 15, 2019

 established Fourth Amendment law, it denied Benner  qualified immunity.  … We held that the of‐ ficer was entitled to qualified immunity. 

James E. Hernandez v. City of Lafayette

643 F.2d 1188 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 1, 1981

Since this court is unaware of any well-established tradition of municipal immunity from damages to compensate for uncompensated takings, 19 we cannot read *1198 into § 1983 an absolute immunity from damages for the City … it would not accord absolute immunity to municipal legislators because “[i]t would be anomalous to establish a greater degree of immunity for municipal officials than is given to the city itself.”

Polyns Bieregu v. Janet Reno L. Yearby G. Berman, All Employees of Mail Room Staffs

59 F.3d 1445 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 11, 1995

Even where- a plaintiff can establish a constitutional violation, under the doctrine of qualified immunity government officials will not be liable if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … In contrast, if “the law is not established clearly when an official acts, he is entitled to qualified immunity because he ‘could not reasonably be expected to anticipate subsequent legal developments.’”

Norris Perry v. Margo Wolfe

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 5, 2017

Qualified immunity protects law enforcement officers from liability for civil damages so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional or statutory rights of which a reasonable person would have … Accordingly, Pennycook does not control this case, and we conclude that Perry’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force was clearly established in August 2009 such that Wolfe was not entitled to 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

Isiah Carl Green v. Dan v. McKaskle Acting Director, Texas Department of Corrections

788 F.2d 1116 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 5, 1986

Furthermore, the Ruiz order may bear on a qualified immunity defense. A remedial decree affirmed on appeal might be important for purposes of providing notice to prison officials of clearly established rights. … A prison official is entitled to the defense of qualified immunity “insofar as [his] conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Ernest Conrod, Jr. v. Roger Davis

120 F.3d 92 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 3, 1997

“[G]overnment officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have … Davis’s actions were reasonable and he is therefore entitled to qualified immunity for the stop, arrest, and search of Appellee Conrad.

Reyes v. City of Richmond TX

287 F.3d 346 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 28, 2002

Officer Cox moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … Importantly, even when all objective facts are viewed in a light most favorable to the Plaintiffs, qualified immunity is clearly not overcome. The court thus has jurisdiction. . . .”

Aubrey Williams v. Daniel Aguirre

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 13, 2020

To overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must also prove that the defendant violated a constitutional right that was “clearly established” when the violation allegedly occurred. Gaines v. … Because Williams has established a genuine dispute over whether the officers violated his clearly established rights under the Fourth Amendment, the officers are not entitled to qualified immunity at this stage of the suit

Kohl ex rel. Kohl v. Woodhaven Learning Center

865 F.2d 930 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 10, 1989

Therefore, we cannot find clearly erroneous the district court’s determination that Woodhaven was the proper residence for Kohl at that time. … In order to avoid immunizing new staff who might leave either before or shortly after becoming immune, Dr.

Chinchello v. Fenton

805 F.2d 126 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 14, 1986

established legal norms. 21 We acknowledge that on these facts the distinction between an "I didn't do it" defense and a qualified immunity defense based on the absence of a clearly established legal duty is not as clear … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. at 818, 102 S.Ct. at 2738, instructed that qualified immunity is unavailable if the defendant's conduct violated "clearly established ... statutory rights" and, based on Davis v.

Womble v. Chrisman

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 21, 2026

Qualified Immunity “[Q]ualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … Layton Hills Mall, 312 F.3d 1304, 1312 (10th Cir. 2002) (“When the record shows an unresolved dispute of historical fact relevant to” the qualified immunity “analysis, a motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity

Anthony Gant v. Daniel Hartman

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 14, 2019

Benner, 913 F.3d 640, 643 (7th Cir. 2019) (affirming denial of qualified immunity). … Officer Hartman claims that he is entitled to qualified im- munity because his actions did not violate Gant’s constitu- tional rights and, even if they did, those rights were not clearly established on or before August 23,

Bilida v. McCleod

211 F.3d 166 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · May 8, 2000

Government officials are "shielded from liability for civil damages" under section 1983 unless their conduct violates "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … In our view, these circumstances establish qualified immunity for these two officers, who were the only present individual defendants implicated in the seizure (as opposed to the destruction) of the animal.

Garcia v. Reeves County, Tex.

32 F.3d 200 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 19, 1994

DUE PROCESS The threshold inquiry in determining whether a government official has violated a clearly established right sufficiently to deprive that official of qualified immunity is whether … However, he is not immune from the consequences of violating complex laws, if they are clearly established, as this one has been since at least 1981. Barrett v.

Mendoza v. Blodgett

960 F.2d 1425 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 1, 1992

Qualified Immunity As a general rule, an official is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Because the impropriety of the defendants’ conduct was not clearly established before this case, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. E.

Debrew v. Auman

354 F. App'x 639 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 25, 2009

“[T]he qualified-immunity defense shields government agents from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … Because the complaint failed to disclose whether the defendants’ actions did not violate a clearly established constitutional right, dismissal on qualified immunity grounds was premature.

Twiggs v. Selig

679 F.3d 990 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 4, 2012

We reverse the district court, finding Angel and Selig are entitled to qualified immunity because Twiggs has not established a constitutional violation. … We review the district court's denial of qualified immunity de novo. Ottman, 341 F.3d at 756.

Eugene Boice, John Di Palermo, and Robert Wahrman v. Unisys Corporation

50 F.3d 1145 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 23, 1995

If so, is the immunity absolute or qualified? The district court (Con. G. … Unisys turned over pre-existing expense vouchers that clearly responded to the subpoena’s description.

Elgin Haynie v. County of Los Angeles Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca David Mertens Jensen, Deputies, in Their Personal and Official Capacities

339 F.3d 1071 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 12, 2003

The appellees claim that their actions are protected under qualified immunity. … Because we conclude that Haynie has failed to allege facts sufficient to establish a violation of any constitutional right, “there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.”