Case law

United Carolina Bank, Administrator Cta of the Estate of Seymour I. Somberg, Deceased v. Board of Regents of Stephen F. Austin State University

665 F.2d 553 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 11, 1982

The defendants’ claim to qualified immunity: State officials, such as the defendants here, enjoy a qualified immunity when sued for damages in their individual capacity under section 1983. … When this immunity is involved a plaintiff must prove that the defendants knew or reasonably should have known that they were acting in violation of the plaintiff’s clearly established constitutional rights, or that the defendants

Haverstick Enterprises, Inc. v. Financial Federal Credit, Inc.

32 F.3d 989 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 19, 1994

The affirmative defense of qualified immunity provides that: government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … In the pending case, H.E.I. enjoyed a clearly established right not to have property in which it enjoyed a lawful possessory interest seized 4 by state action in violation of the constitution.

United States v. Alexander

888 F.3d 628 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 1, 2018

For those reasons, among others, we held that the plaintiff's warrantless arrest on his driveway did not violate clearly established law and, therefore, the arresting officer was entitled to qualified immunity. Id. … Moreover, the case was decided on qualified immunity grounds, and held at most that there was no clearly established law at the time determining whether the officer had violated the Constitution. Id. at 596 .

Briggs v. Goodwin

569 F.2d 10 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 1, 1977

The fate of an official with qualified immunity depends upon the circumstances and motivations of his actions, as established by the evidence at trial." 17 80 The decision whether qualified or absolute immunity is appropriate … Where the common law had established a qualified immunity for the official, the Court has maintained that standard in the § 1983 actions as well: Pierson v. Ray, supra (policemen); Wood v.

Omar Gay v. Amy Parsons

61 F.4th 1088 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 13, 2023

entitled to summary judgment and qualified immunity on the retaliation claim. … We therefore leave the question of qualified immunity to the district court. AFFIRMED.

Maitland v. University of Minnesota

155 F.3d 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 16, 1998

result in a conclusion that the defendants violated clearly established law. … Our holding in Part II of this opinion requires reversal of the qualified immunity decision.

Burns-Toole v. Byrne

11 F.3d 1270 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 19, 1994

An action brought under § 1983 against a state actor in his individual capacity, however, is subject to the defense of qualified immunity. … a defendant's defense of qualified immunity.12 To do so, the plaintiff must show that the defendants' conduct was not objectively reasonable and, further, that the defendants violated clearly established law.13

Feist v. Simonson

222 F.3d 455 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 25, 2000

The district court denied Simonson's motion for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. … established law, a qualified immunity defense will ordinarily fail, since a reasonable government actor should or would have known the law governing his conduct was a constitutional principle supported by clearly established

Unpublished Disposition John Perotti, Cross-Appellant v. Richard Seiter, Gary Brown, Cross-Appellee

869 F.2d 1492 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 16, 1989

B. 18 Brown also argues that his actions were protected by the defense of qualified good faith immunity as set out in Harlow v. … established" before the incidents in this case occurred. 22 But even if it were not, we would decline to resolve Brown's appeal on his qualified immunity argument, because he has waived the defense by failing to raise it

Turkmen v. Ashcroft

589 F.3d 542 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 18, 2009

Ct. 808, 818 (2009) (concluding 21 that two-step qualified immunity analysis set forth in 22 Saucier v. … immunity 14 with respect to claim 1. 15 Similarly, plaintiffs point to no authority clearly 16 establishing an equal protection right to be free of 17 selective enforcement of the immigration laws based

Christie A. Thomas v. Gregory Dickel

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 30, 2000

whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.' " Pace v. … law, or it is at least a matter of genuine factual dispute under clearly established law, and thus summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity was improperly granted.

Vela v. White

703 F.2d 147 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 18, 1983

Defendant Guerrero has pleaded that on the occasion in question he acted in “good faith”, thus invoking the defense of qualified immunity. … Each Defendant, however, pleads the defense of qualified immunity. As to Byrd, the defense is clearly not available.

Dehne v. Hill

74 F. App'x 794 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 8, 2003

Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity for acts that do not violate “clearly established ... constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Qualified immunity is therefore unavailable to Hill on summary judgment. REVERSED and REMANDED.

Bolton v. City of Dallas TX

472 F.3d 261 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 7, 2006

The should be dismissed because he is entitled to chief of police is a political position, and a qualified immunity. … Bolton’s claims against Benavides in his individual capacity are DISMISSED based on qualified immunity.

Rodriguez v. Shulman

844 F. Supp. 2d 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 21, 2012

Qualified Immunity In addition, qualified immunity bars claims against public officials for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Compl., ¶¶ 49, 56, 57, violate a clearly established constitutional right. All claims against federal and state officials relating to Isidoro’s disbarment, accordingly, are barred by qualified immunity. *13 5.

Rodríguez-Rodríguez v. Ortiz-Vélez

391 F.3d 36 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Dec 8, 2004

Medina and the mayor quite briefly invoked qualified immunity, saying that neither had foreseen how events would develop. … Assuming that Rodriguez could prove at trial his own sworn version of events, it is barely possible — even though extremely unlikely — that he could establish a claim against Medina for which qualified immunity would not

Donald Eugene Moore v. James C. Morgan and County Commissioners John Crowder A.C. Farrington Doss Leak Mack Sanders J.H. Richardson, Donald Eugene Moore v. James C. Morgan County Commissioners Emerson Thompson Morris Garrett Mary Sue Smith Mack Sanders Doss Leak

922 F.2d 1553 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 7, 1991

He correctly stated that the test for qualified immunity is an objective one: whether reasonable county commissioners could have concluded their conduct to be lawful in light of clearly established law and the information … established constitutional rights

Aversa v. United States

99 F.3d 1200 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Oct 21, 1996

And a federal official is qualifiedly immune from suit for an alleged constitutional tort if his "conduct [did] not violate clearly established . . . constitutional rights of which a … An official is qualifiedly immune if his "conduct [did] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v.

Santos v. Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services

200 F. App'x 681 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 31, 2006

established. … Even if a violation occurred, however, the social workers are entitled to qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established that someone with Santos’s ties to Albert has a liberty interest arising under the Due

Hager v. Pike County Board of Education

286 F.3d 366 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 29, 2002

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Therefore, defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity and summary judgment is inappropriate. III.