Case law

Murphy v. Grochowski

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 28, 2022

constitutional rights violation, and if so, 2) whether those rights were “clearly established” at the time of the incident.). … Based on the defendants’ failure to fully develop their argument as to qualified immunity, the report finds that they have not established this affirmative defense. See Burns v. Pa.

Johnson v. King

District Court, D. Connecticut · Dec 12, 2019

Qualified immunity “protects 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 … Recently, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of qualified immunity and stated that “it is again necessary to reiterate the longstanding principle that ‘clearly established law’ should not be defined ‘at a high level

Parks v. Blanchette

144 F. Supp. 3d 282 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Nov 4, 2015

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity for the *300 retaliation and deliberate indifference claims 8 , because the rights at issue were not sufficiently clearly established at the … “A government official performing a discretionary function is entitled to qualified immunity provided his or her ‘conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

WATERS v. SAEZ

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 15, 2020

Henry is also entitled to qualified immunity. See Reichle v. … that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”).

(PC) Caruso v. Johnson

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 25, 2020

16  1 Legal Standard 2 Qualified immunity applies when an official's conduct does not violate clearly established 3 statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … City of Roseville, 882 F.3d 843, 856-57 (9th Cir. 2018) (noting that Ninth Circuit 15 precedent is sufficient to meet the “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity).

Coulter v. Butler

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 15, 2025

“‘When a defendant raises a qualified immunity defense, the court must dismiss the action unless the plaintiff shows that (1) the defendant violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the right was clearly established … “Law is clearly established ‘if a plaintiff (1) identifies an on-point Supreme Court or published Tenth Circuit decision or (2) shows the clearly established weight of authority from other courts has found the law to be

Valle Arrizon v. Wolf

District Court, W.D. Michigan · Oct 21, 2021

Qualified Immunity (Count II) Defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity to Plaintiff’s RFRA claim in Count II. See Tanzin v. Tanvir, 141 S. … The “clearly established” standard also requires that the legal principle clearly prohibit the officer’s conduct in the particular circumstances before him.

Wolff, Ronald v. Virgil, Tina

District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Aug 4, 2023

Holloway, 510 U.S. 510, 516 (1994) (“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established … Plaintiffs oppose this motion, but as discussed in detail above, defendant Yerges is entitled to qualified immunity unless plaintiffs show that he violated a clearly established law of which a reasonable officer should

Sturm v. Ross

11 F. Supp. 2d 942 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 10, 1998

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for conduct in the course of their official duties unless the alleged conduct violated clearly established law of which a reasonable public official would have … The Fifth Circuit has developed a two-step process for the examination of a claim of qualified immunity. The first inquiry is whether Plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

Chambers v. Puff

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 8, 2021

Lemmon, 911 F.3d 412, 419 (7th Cir. 2018) (finding waiver where plaintiff did not address the “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity in the district court). … What this argument ignores is the fact that qualified immunity is a question of law for the Court to decide; the existence of a clearly established right is not an issue for a jury. Brown v. Knapp, 156 F.

Fowler v. Batts

District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Nov 19, 2024

Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages “unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’ … Evans, 90 F.4th 541, 548 (6th Cir. 2024) (the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiff’s cursory briefing makes no attempt to meet his burden of showing that the defendant violated his clearly

Tripathy v. Lockwood

District Court, W.D. New York · Aug 29, 2024

Wright, 597 F.3d 532, 536 (2d Cir. 2010) (finding that the district court did not err in granting qualified immunity on the plaintiff’s RLUIPA claim where the right claimed by the plaintiff was not clearly established at … The case law provides that Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on that claim as a matter of law.

Johnson v. Holms

District Court, D. Nevada · Mar 29, 2024

to be clearly established. … immunity. 8 The Court now turns to whether this right was clearly established.

Arriaga v. Dart

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 29, 2021

Qualified immunity “protects government officials from civil liability when performing discretionary functions so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … To overcome a qualified immunity defense, plaintiff’s “allegations [must] make out a deprivation of a constitutional right,” and “the right at issue [must be] clearly established at the time of the defendant's

Vigil v. Tweed

District Court, D. New Mexico · Jul 14, 2021

analysis (whether the law is clearly established). … Defendants violated clearly established law, the Court grants the County Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s federal constitutional claims on the basis of qualified immunity. II.

Powell v. Shelton

District Court, E.D. Missouri · Oct 19, 2020

Defendants Brown and Shelton are entitled to qualified immunity if their conduct did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Hayek, 488 F.3d at 1054-55 (upholding qualified immunity for fatal shooting).

Aska

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 23, 2026

Although it’s true that qualified immunity provides “ample protection to all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law,” it is clearly established that use of excessive force during an arrest is … City of Albuquerque, 813 F.3d 912, 929 n.9 (10th Cir. 2015) (“A circuit split will not satisfy the clearly established prong of qualified immunity.”) with Williams v.

Ramirez v. Killian

District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 12, 2022

violated clearly established law.” … Plaintiffs Failed to Prove a Violation of Their Clearly Established Rights Qualified immunity applies if a reasonable officer could have believed the disputed act was lawful in light of clearly established law and

LEE v. CLARK

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 1, 2025

That is not how qualified immunity works. Qualified immunity is determined on a claim-by-claim basis, See Behrens v. … Pa, 2018) (“It would be strange to say that right X is clearly established just because right Y is clearly established and happens to prohibitthe same conduct.”), On this basis alone, reconsideration is improper

Zarkower v. City of New York

District Court, E.D. New York · May 21, 2020

The defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the alleged conduct does not violate a clearly established right. I disagree. … Qualified Immunity “A police officer is entitled to qualified immunity from liability for his discretionary actions if either (1) his conduct does not violate clearly established