Case law

Doe v. Woodard

912 F.3d 1278 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 3, 2019

We reversed the district court’s grant of qualified immunity. … I first address the “clearly established” prong. McCoy v. Meyers, 887 F.3d 1034, 1045 (10th Cir. 2018) (“Courts have discretion to decide the order in which to engage the two qualified immunity prongs.”

Buonocore v. Harris

65 F.3d 347 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Sep 12, 1995

established’ for qualified immunity purposes.” … They do broadly assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the right “allegedly violated” was not “clearly established.” Appellants’ Brief at 20 (emphasis added).

Dolihite v. Maughon

74 F.3d 1027 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 23, 1996

The qualified immunity analysis requires the court to determine whether a defendant violated clearly established constitutional law. 21 In Harlow v. … is insufficient to clearly establish the law for purposes of overcoming the appellants’ qualified immunity claims in this ease. 23 In determining whether the appellants in this case are entitled to qualified immunity, we

Sample v. Bailey

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 9, 2005

Clearly Established Right Having established that there was a constitutional violation, we turn to the second step of the qualified immunity analysis — whether the constitutional right at issue was clearly established … qualified immunity.

Joan Gruenke, Individually and as Parent and Natural Guardian of Leah Gruenke, a Minor v. Michael Seip

225 F.3d 290 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 21, 2000

When the defendant violates a clearly established right about which a reasonable person would have known, he is not entitled to qualified immunity. See, e.g., Parkhurst v. … to qualified immunity.

Rodriguez v. Phillips

66 F.3d 470 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 15, 1995

Moreover, defendants’ actions at that time must have been objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established federal law; otherwise, those actors are entitled to qualified immunity. … Summary judgment is particularly appropriate when the qualified immunity defense is based on a showing that an asserted right was not clearly established since the inquiry as to whether a right was or was not clearly established

Mark A. Campbell v. Kevin Kallas

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 19, 2019

As relevant here, the judge rejected the claim of qualified immunity, concluding that caselaw clearly established a constitutional right to effective medical treatment. We reverse. … Because no case clearly establishes that denying treatment beyond hormone therapy is unconstitu- tional, qualified immunity applies regardless.

Charles Brumitt v. Sam Smith

102 F.4th 444 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 20, 2024

circumstances was ‘clearly established.’” … denying qualified immunity.

Irish v. Fowler

979 F.3d 65 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 5, 2020

was clearly established. … their conduct was 'clearly established at the time.'"

Aaron Spann v. Police Officer A.G. Rainey, Aaron Spann v. A.G. Rainey, Police Officer, A.G. Rainey, Police Officer

987 F.2d 1110 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 25, 1993

As a police officer, Rainey is immune from both suit and liability unless it is shown that, at the time of the incident, he violated a clearly established constitutional right. Salas v. … objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law in 1987.

Michael J. Gorra v. Floyd Hanson, Patrick Chase, Minnesota State Highway Patrol, an Agency or Division of the State of Minnesota

880 F.2d 95 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 24, 1989

DISCUSSION A law enforcement officer is shielded by qualified immunity from civil liability if the officer “[did] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … The objective legal reasonableness of the troopers’ conduct must be evaluated in *98 light of law that was clearly established when the arrest occurred. Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. at 2738 .

Martha Romero v. City of Grapevine, Texas

888 F.3d 170 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 20, 2018

. § 1983 on the basis of qualified immunity. For the reasons stated below, we AFFIRM. … because the right, defined at a fact specific level, was not clearly established at the time of the violation.

Tommy D. Hopkins v. John L. Saunders

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 23, 1996

Qualified Immunity Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are generally immune from suit in performing discretionary duties if "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … The district court determined, however, that the right to such a hearing was clearly established by section 105.055 and thus denied the officials qualified immunity. We disagree.

Massachusetts Furniture & Piano Movers Association, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission

773 F.2d 391 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Sep 30, 1985

Moreover, the FTC argues, both the Commission and the AU applied the Midcal standard to the facts of this case and found that the Association failed to establish a clearly articulated Massachusetts policy to promote anti-competitive … Accordingly, the Association met its first burden in establishing Parker immunity. 7 In order to be immunized from antitrust liability under Parker , the Association must also satisfy the second prong of the Midcal test —

Fredrick K. Koch v. Town of Brattleboro, Vermont, Sherwood D. Lake, Jr., and John Doe, Unidentified Brattleboro Police Officer

287 F.3d 162 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 29, 2002

Because the law on that question is not clearly established, the Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. Therefore, we AFFIRM the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Defendants. I. … Therefore, Koch cannot point to a “clearly established right” that Lake and Holbrook violated in order to break the officers’ qualified immunity and survive the summary judgment motion. 3.

Elder v. Holloway

510 U.S. 510 · Supreme Court of the United States · Feb 23, 1994

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials like respondents from damages actions unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law. … Davis , in short, concerned not the authorities a court may consider in determining qualified immunity, but this entirely discrete question: Is qualified immunity defeated where a defendant violates any clearly established

High v. Fuchs

74 F. App'x 499 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 25, 2003

prohibited and, and therefore, qualified immunity was improper. … We have established that there are two ways in which a plaintiff seeking to overcome the bar of qualified immunity can show that a right was clearly established in the law at the time the alleged violation occurred.

Weyant v. Okst

101 F.3d 845 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 3, 1996

In general, public officials 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 … That version is sharply disputed, and the matter of the officers’ qualified immunity therefore cannot be resolved as a matter of law.

Wagner v. Bay City Texas

227 F.3d 316 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 27, 2000

as to how long the de- unreasonable excessive force in light of clearly fendants held Gutierrez on the ground, how established law. … summary established right has been violated judgment on their qualified immunity defenses.

Morgan v. Swanson

659 F.3d 359 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 27, 2011

not clearly established, we address step two of the qualified-immunity inquiry first. … IV We hold today that the principals are entitled to qualified immunity because clearly established law did not put the constitutionality of their actions beyond debate.