Case law

Mark Janus v. American Federation of State

942 F.3d 352 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 5, 2019

An example that comes readily to mind is the qualified immunity doctrine, which is available for a public employee if the asserted constitutional right that she violated was not clearly established. … As we hinted earlier, however, the reason is simple: the liability of private parties under section 1983 was not clearly established until, at the earliest, the Court’s decision in United States v.

National Commodity And Barter Association v. Gibbs

886 F.2d 1240 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 25, 1989

With respect to these claims, the district court ruled that they were barred by the doctrine of qualified immunity, as the defendants were simply carrying out their jobs and had not violated any clearly established laws in … While we agree with the district court's reasoning that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity as to the plaintiffs' Bivens claims, we do not reach this issue.

Kayser v. Caspari

16 F.3d 280 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 9, 1994

Caspari and Buescher moved for summary judgement on the basis of qualified immunity. The district court denied this motion concluding that Kayser had alleged a violation of clearly established Eighth Amendment law. … Accordingly, we reverse without reaching the issue of qualified immunity. 2 Section 1983 requires the plaintiff to allege that state actors violated his constitutional rights.

Randy Saylor, Sr. v. Board Of Education Of Harlan County, Kentucky

118 F.3d 507 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 22, 1997

, we conclude that judgment ought to have been entered in favor of the individual defendants on the basis of qualified immunity. … Although the central issue in many qualified immunity cases is whether a particular constitutional right was "clearly established" at the time of the alleged violation--see, e.g., Walton v.

Stanley Sylvester Harris v. Richard Young, Terrell Don Hutto

718 F.2d 620 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 16, 1983

The District Court granted Hutto’s and Young’s motion for summary judgment, holding that they were entitled to qualified immunity under Procunier v. Navarette, 434 U.S. 555 , 98 S.Ct. 855 , 55 L.Ed.2d 24 (1978). … Most recently in Harlow, supra, the Supreme Court discussed the immunity to be given to public officials, and applying that analysis in this case we agree with the District Court that Hutto did not violate the “clearly established

Rocky Lynn Thompson v. Timothy Zimmerman

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 1, 2003

Peninger were entitled to qualified immunity. For the reasons discussed below, we reverse the judgment of the district court and remand the case to the district court for further proceedings. … We further conclude that the constitutional right asserted by Thompson--the right to be free from excessive force--was clearly established on the date of Thompson’s arrest and alleged beating. See Guite v.

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

Jones v. Ward

514 F. App'x 843 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 25, 2013

Jones admits that Ward was acting within the scope of his discretionary authority, so Jones must now show that Ward violated one of her clearly established rights. See Lewis v. … Therefore, the allegations in Jones’s complaint cannot establish a claim for malicious prosecution, and the district court was correct to grant Ward qualified immunity from suit.

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.

Joseph C. Spagnola, Jr. v. William Mathis, (Two Cases) Joseph C. Spagnola, Jr. v. William Mathis

809 F.2d 16 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 6, 1987

It concluded that federal officials would be granted immunity only if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Appellants cannot plausibly suggest that a reasonable person would not find these rights to be “clearly established.”

Romeo v. Untalan, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Ronnie C. Untalan Corazon Untalan v. City of Lorain

430 F.3d 312 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 7, 2005

whether the right was clearly established must be considered on a more specific level.” … He therefore is entitled to qualified immunity. This analysis finds support in Russo v.

Bingue v. Prunchak

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 14, 2008

Ct. 1769, 1774 n.2 (2007) (“Qualified immunity is ‘an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability . . . .’ … “On the other hand, if a violation could be made out on a favorable view of the par- ties’ submissions, the next, sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established.” Id.

Watson v. Schwarzenegger

347 F. App'x 282 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 23, 2009

The district court did not err in determining that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on Watson’s fifth and twelfth claims. … Assuming that there was a constitutional violation, the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct was not in violation of clearly established law at the time of Watson’s arrest or his parole revocation

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

Davenport v. Causey

521 F.3d 544 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 4, 2008

Officer Causey based his motion on qualified immunity, arguing that his actions did not violate the Constitution and that even if they did, it was not clearly established that such actions would violate the Constitution. … Officer Causey’s Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity for a police officer in his individual capacity involves a two-step analysis.

Elwell v. Oklahoma, Ex Rel. Board of Regents

693 F.3d 1303 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 11, 2012

state immunity. … Elwell argues, the State clearly anticipated OADA suits against it and, in this way, waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity. 3 The difficulty is, the OADA doesn’t exist in a vacuum.

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.

Kornegay v. Cottingham

120 F.3d 392 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 23, 1997

The district court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment based upon their assertion of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity turns on the reasonableness of the officers' belief that their conduct was legal not its legality per se.

Hansen v. PT BANK NEGARA INDONESIA (PERSERO), TBK

601 F.3d 1059 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 13, 2010

do not subject the defendant to the burdensome pretrial discovery that qualified immunity protects against. … orders that undermine their immunities, “is not unlike that attendant to claims that challenge domestic government officials’ qualified immunity from suit”).

LA Real Estate Appraiser Board v. FTC

976 F.3d 597 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 2, 2020

Drawing an analogy with principles that animate interlocutory appeals of government officials’ claims of absolute or qualified immunity, or the Eleventh Amendment, this court reasoned that making a “state or state … or subdivision [of the state] acted pursuant to a clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed state policy.’”