Case law

Elizabeth Barrett, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Harold Blauer, Deceased v. United States of America, James Cattell, Newton Bigelow, David Marcus, Estate of Amedeo S. Marazzi, Van M. Sim, Herbert K. Greer, Frederick C. Lough, Harris J. North, William M. Creasy, John H. Derrick and George S. Leonard, Appeal of United States of America, Estate of Amedeo S. Marazzi, Van M. Sim, Herbert K. Greer, Frederick C. Lough, Harris J. North, William M. Creasy and George S. Leonard, Elizabeth Barrett, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Harold Blauer, Deceased, Elizabeth Barrett v. United States of America, James Cattell, Newton Bigelow, David Marcus, Estate of Amedeo S. Marazzi, Van M. Sim, Herbert K. Greer, Frederick C. Lough, Harris J. North, William M. Creasy, John H. Derrick and George S. Leonard, David Marcus

798 F.2d 565 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 31, 1986

insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … Where plaintiffs allege the violation of a clearly established Constitutional norm, and that the offensive conduct gave rise to a remedy in damages, qualified immunity is not applicable.

Edward Schoettle v. Jefferson County

788 F.3d 855 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 11, 2015

In claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, “qualified immunity shields government officials from liability and the burdens of litigation unless their conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right … Schoettle must present sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of fact as to whether the deputies violated a clearly established right in order to overcome their assertion of qualified immunity.

Charles Anthony George v. Thomas Maul

214 F.3d 350 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 5, 2000

Defendants moved to dismiss plaintiff's complaint asserting qualified immunity, a defense that depends upon whether the right plaintiff asserts is so clearly established that defendants should have known it. … But whether qualified immunity applies depends on whether the right violated was clearly established. See Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 .

John Clevenger v. R.E. Gartner

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 27, 2004

Appellees moved for summary judgment, arguing in part that section 650.055.2 afforded immunity to those who collect DNA samples and they were entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields public officials from civil liability and suit unless (1) their conduct violated a constitutional right of the plaintiff- prisoner that was clearly established prior to the time of

Lempar v. Collier

710 F. App'x 231 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 31, 2018

established law that overcomes a qualified immunity defense, Pearson v. … A denial of qualified immunity must identify factual disputes tied to a particular defendant that overcome the immunity defense. Meadours v. Ermel, 483 F.3d 417, 422 (5th Cir. 2007).

Smith v. Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade & Consumer Protection

23 F.3d 1134 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 2, 1994

Rather,' satisfied that the officers had not violated any “clearly established” constitutional right, the court dismissed the complaint against the officers on qualified immunity grounds. Both plaintiffs appeal. IV. … The district court found that the individual officers enjoyed qualified immunity, and dismissed the claims against them because none of their actions violated Smith’s clearly established rights. Harlow v.

Marshall v. Sullivan

105 F.3d 47 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 17, 1996

In general, police officers 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 violate … The availability of the defense depends on whether “ ‘a reasonable officer could have believed’” his action “ ‘to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information [he] possessed.’” Hunter v.

Gwendolyn Daniel v. Univ of TX SW Health Systems

960 F.3d 253 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 2, 2020

The Texas Legislature has established both the University of Texas and the UT 1 System. See TEX. EDUC. CODE §§ 65.01–65.461, 67.01–67.62. … Ct. 1327, 1333 (2012) (“A foundational premise of the federal system is that States, as sovereigns, are immune from suits for damages, save as they elect to waive that defense” or Congress has clearly abrogated immunity via

Gulley v. Elizabeth City Police Department

340 F. App'x 108 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 27, 2009

The Court reasoned that, if Gulley’s account was correct, the Officers were not entitled to qualified immunity as it was clearly established that the “beating an unarmed suspect, multiple times on the face and head while … a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.”

Moss v. Kopp

559 F.3d 1155 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 18, 2009

3) the deputies’ conduct is protected by qualified immunity. … Because we have found that the appellees are entitled to dismissal on grounds other than qualified immunity, we need not determine if the appellees would be entitled to dismissal based on qualified immunity under the facts

Daniel Engel v. Robert Buchan

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 5, 2013

We also held that the agents were not protected by qualified immunity because the constitutional right in question was clearly established at the time of the events at issue in the case. … Qualified immunity “pro- tects 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

Larry Kemp v. David Liebel

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 11, 2017

The Doctrine of Qualified Immunity  “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government  officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their con‐ duct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitu … Liebel Did Not Violate Clearly Established Law  Under this framework, it is clear that Liebel is protected  by qualified immunity. 

Wages v. Internal Revenue Service

915 F.2d 1230 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 9, 1990

Finally, the defendants are clearly entitled to qualified immunity, since no prior decisions from our circuit have clearly established any of the constitutional rights alleged to have been violated in the amended complaint … Kelly, 858 F.2d 571, 573 (9th Cir.1988) (listing qualified immunity standard); see also Bothke v.

Lowell Dean Wilson v. David Flynn Jason Butler Town of Ayden

429 F.3d 465 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Nov 15, 2005

If so, then a court must determine if that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. Id. … But “[i]f no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.” Id. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

Uhlrig v. Harder

64 F.3d 567 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 30, 1995

Qualified Immunity 21 In accordance with the approach set forth in Siegert v. … Court case controls the issue or that the clearly established weight of authority supports plaintiff's claim).

Rene Valdivia v. Derek Porsch

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 6, 2026

We review a grant of summary judgment based on qualified immunity de novo. Michael v. Trevena, 899 F.3d 528, 531 (8th Cir. 2018). … -3- he violated a constitutional right, and (2) that constitutional right was clearly established so that a reasonable officer would know of the right at the time of the alleged

David Sample v. City of Woodbury

836 F.3d 913 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 6, 2016

to establish a conflicts policy; and that the City enjoyed derivative absolute immunity on the claims. … Yet owing to the qualified immunity enjoyed by most government officials, many victims of municipal malfeasance would be left remediless if the city were also allowed to assert a good-faith defense.

Bible Believers v. Wayne County

805 F.3d 228 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 28, 2015

Qualified Immunity Bible Believers’ damages claim against the officers in their individual capacities should fail under qualified immunity because there was, and still remains, no clearly established law pertaining to this … To determine whether a government official is entitled to qualified immunity, we must ask whether “a constitutional right would have been violated on the facts alleged” and, if so, whether the right was “clearly established

Dunn v. Carroll

40 F.3d 287 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 15, 1994

The Magistrate Judge also concluded that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity, since there was not a clearly established right to wear an extraneous emblem on a fireman's uniform or to call one's superior a … Under the rules of qualified immunity, an official performing discretionary functions will generally be immune from liability unless a reasonable person in his position would have known that his actions violated clearly established

Lillian J. Del Carmen Franco-De Jerez v. Filomeno Burgos

876 F.2d 1038 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jun 2, 1989

Our discussion is perhaps rather lengthy, because we do not base our decision on the defense of qualified immunity. A. October 1-2. … First, Burgos did not plead qualified immunity as an affirmative defense. See p. 1040, supra.