Case law

Jane Doe v. Taylor Independent School District, and Mike Caplinger and Eddy Lankford

975 F.2d 137 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 2, 1992

Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 529-30 , 105 S.Ct. 2806, 2817 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) (denial of qualified immunity is an immediately appealable order). … There is no dispute that the burden of establishing an entitlement to qualified immunity is on Superintendent Caplinger and Principal Lankford, the officials seeking to invoke it. Stoneking v.

Buchanan Ex Rel. Estate of Buchanan v. Maine

469 F.3d 158 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 16, 2006

Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001), this circuit uses a three-part test when evaluating a question of qualified immunity. … At the time of the deputies' visit to Buchanan's home, it had been clearly established that "a warrantless entry . . . of a residence may be 'reasonable,' in Fourth Amendment terms," but was not reasonable unless "the

Waterman v. Batton

393 F.3d 471 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 3, 2005

Thus, government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages to the extent that "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … established' for qualified immunity purposes" and that "`[c]learly established' in this context includes not only already specifically adjudicated rights, but those manifestly included within more general applications of

Samuel Colaizzi and Samuel Indovina v. Daniel Walker, Governor, State of Illinois Donald Page Moore, Etc., and Lauri Staples

655 F.2d 828 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 5, 1981

. *830 The district court granted Summary Judgment upon a finding that defendants had established the defense of qualified good faith immunity as a matter of law. … good faith immunity had been established as a matter of law.

Brown v. Li

299 F.3d 1092 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 12, 2002

Qualified Immunity on the First Amendment Claim We apply a three-step test to determine whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity on a federal constitutional claim. … Qualified Immunity on the Procedural Due Process Claim Plaintiff also argues that Defendants violated his clearly established right to due process when they “withheld [Plaintiffs] degree and otherwise harmed [him] without

Mata v. Saiz

427 F.3d 745 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 21, 2005

If the plaintiff fails to meet her burden on this threshold inquiry, the qualified immunity inquiry comes to an end. Id. … Because the district court never reached the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis and there is little doubt that deliberate indifference to an inmate’s serious medical need is a clearly established constitutional

Maria Pena v. City of Rio Grande City, Texa

879 F.3d 613 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 12, 2018

Qualified Immunity Having determined that Peña sufficiently pleaded Fourth Amendment violations by both officers, we would ordinarily turn to QI and decide whether said violations were clearly established at the time … The district court dismissed that claim because Peña was “unable to establish that sovereign immunity ha[d] been waived.” We agree.

Frankie Schwartz v. Tom William Pridy

94 F.3d 453 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 26, 1996

The court concluded that Schwartz had not alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right and that summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity was therefore warranted. … Pridy and Keck are entitled to qualified immunity unless they violated Schwartz's "`clearly established' constitutional rights." Prosser v.

Docket No. 01-7161

285 F.3d 201 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 26, 2002

The employee's right to be free from such retaliation has been clearly established since at least 1968. 57 Defendants contend that this prohibition is inapplicable here as a matter of law because Munafo's complaints were … Accordingly, this Court, in order to review the individual defendants' contention that the district court's ruling on this branch of their qualified immunity motions mistakenly identified clearly established law, must "undertake

Garmon v. Lumpkin County

878 F.2d 1406 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 4, 1989

The district court granted defendants’ motion for directed verdict based upon the doctrine of qualified immunity. For the reasons stated below, we reverse. On January 22, 1986, Mrs. … Garmon’s warrant was issued without probable cause he nevertheless is shielded from liability for damages under the rule of qualified immunity.

Ferguson v. City of Phoenix

157 F.3d 668 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 3, 1998

To determine if an individual is entitled to qualified immunity, we must determine (1) the specific right allegedly violated; (2) whether this right was so “clearly established” as to alert a reasonable officer to its constitutional … Therefore, we conclude that the right at issue was not clearly established, and as a result, Commander Rodabough was entitled to qualified immunity.

Gregory v. City of Louisville

444 F.3d 725 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 4, 2006

of clearly established law." … The Supreme Court noted that when the issue on qualified immunity turned on whether the facts, as alleged, constituted a violation of clearly established constitutional law, the issue on appeal was sufficiently separate from

David Saxner and Alfred Cain, Jr., Cross-Appellants v. Charles Benson, Cross-Appellees

727 F.2d 669 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 13, 1984

effect of qualified immunity is limited. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) (defense of qualified immunity unavailable if actions clearly are at variance with established constitutional right). .

Cleamtee Garner, Father and Next-Of-Kin of Edward Eugene Garner, a Deceased Minor v. Memphis Police Department City of Memphis, Tennessee

8 F.3d 358 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 7, 1993

[The City] was not at the time following a clearly established unlawful or unconstitutional policy.” Id. at 1137 . Carter’s retroactivity analysis is clearly not relevant to the instant case. In Tennessee v. … Plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment asserts that there remain no genuine issues of material fact, and that the law clearly establishes defendants’ liability.

Joseph F. Collinson v. John M. Gott, Sr., Individually and as President of the Board of County Commissioners of Calvert County Board of County Commissioners of Calvert County, Edward Bowen, Individually and as a Lieutenant in the Sheriff's Department of Calvert County, Maryland Patrick Nutter, Individually and as a Sergeant in the Sheriff's Department of Calvert County, Maryland, Joseph F. Collinson v. John M. Gott, Sr., Individually and as President of the Board of County Commissioners of Calvert County Board of County Commissioners of Calvert County Edward Bowen, Individually and as a Lieutenant in the Sheriff's Department of Calvert County, Maryland Patrick Nutter, Individually and as a Sergeant in the Sheriff's Department of Calvert County, Maryland

895 F.2d 994 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 13, 1990

Accordingly, the now-familiar test of qualified immunity is whether government officials such as Gott in performing discretionary functions have engaged in conduct that violates "clearly established statutory or constitutional … immunity it is therefore necessary first to identify the specific constitutional right allegedly violated, then to inquire whether at the time of the alleged violation it was clearly established, then further to inquire

Arbogast v. Kansas Department of Labor

789 F.3d 1174 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 19, 2015

It is well established that orders denying state entities Eleventh Amendment immunity are immediately reviewable under the collateral order doctrine. Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer Auth. v. … Third, KDOL argues its Workers Compensation Division qualifies as a separate “program or activity” under the Rehabilitation Act, and therefore any waiver of immunity based on funds received by the Unemployment Insurance

Derrick Neely-Beytarik-El v. Daniel Conley

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 2, 2019

Turning to the issue of qualified immunity, Mr. Neely-Bey asserted that it was clearly established that IDOC could not restrict his right to practice his religion ex- cept when required by penological interests. Mr. … Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil “liability ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable per- son would have known.’”

Elliott v. Leavitt

105 F.3d 174 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 24, 1997

It is one thing for courts to deny qualified immunity on the basis of a violation of clearly established law. It is quite another to demand as a condition of that immunity that officers actually await the bullet. … It is no violation of clearly established law for an officer to act to save his own life.

Sarah Gable v. Ronald G. Lewis Kenneth T. Woehrmyer, Roger Hannay

201 F.3d 769 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 13, 2000

Second, he argues that the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity because the “constitutional right [asserted] must be clearly established in a particularized sense” under Anderson v. … We also conclude that the law was clearly established that the “public concern” test does not apply to plaintiffs petitioning activity.

Commuter Transportation Systems, Inc. v. Hillsborough County Aviation Authority

801 F.2d 1286 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 15, 1986

Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985), the Supreme Court found that denial of a summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity is immediately appealable. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), the court found that denial of qualified immunity is immediately appealable because of social costs.