Case law

Cojocaru v. City University of New York

District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 29, 2021

Further, the Individual CUNY Defendants intend to argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity and “[u]ntil the threshold issue of qualified immunity has been decided, “discovery should not be allowed.” … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985) (“Unless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery

Estate of Ryan J Mitchell v. City of Waupun

District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Jan 25, 2023

To overcome a defendant’s claim of qualified immunity, “the plaintiff[] must show both (1) that the facts make out a constitutional violation, and (2) that the constitutional right was ‘clearly established’ at the time … claim of qualified immunity.

McIntosh Ex Rel. Estate of McIntosh v. Smith

690 F. Supp. 2d 515 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 2, 2010

Qualified Immunity “[government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages [by qualified immunity] insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … and the then clearly established law.

Vincent Henderson Daryelle Rexrode John Calella v. Stuart O. Simms Richard Lanham, Sr. William O. Filbert

223 F.3d 267 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 28, 2000

The district court dismissed Appellants’ suit on the ground of qualified immunity, reasoning that Appellees did not violate Appellants’ clearly established constitutional rights under the Fourth or Fourteenth Amendment. … To that end, qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Williamson v. City of Virginia Beach, Va.

786 F. Supp. 1238 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Mar 13, 1992

“controlling precedent”) has, for qualified immunity purposes, “clearly established” such right. See Jensen v. … jurisdictions), can “clearly establish” a right for qualified immunity purposes.

Hawkins v. Steingut

829 F.2d 317 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 18, 1987

We hold that defendants did not violate any of Hawkins’ clearly-established federal rights by failing to reappoint him, and therefore the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law. … The court found that the individual Board members were not entitled to qualified immunity from suit, apparently on the theory that Hawkins had a clearly-established first amendment right not to be terminated from his job

Mallett Jr. v. Goines

District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 22, 2021

This second prong of the qualified immunity analysis involves “two separate inquiries: whether the allegedly violated constitutional rights were clearly established at the time of the incident; and, if so, whether the conduct … City of Arlington, Texas, 16 F.4th 1159 (Sth Cir. 2021) (affirming the dismissal of claims based on qualified immunity when “the plaintiffs failed to identify any clearly established law that would place beyond doubt the

55 Fair empl.prac.cas. 338, 51 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 39,294 William D. Crutcher, Marion L. Madry v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, Appeal of H. David Owens

883 F.2d 502 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 30, 1989

whether Owens violated clearly established constitutional rights, and *504 whether Madry sustained her burden of producing direct evidence of racially-based animus. … In remanding this issue, we note a confusion that has arisen at oral argument on this qualified immunity appeal.

David C. Skrtich v. Timothy Alvin Thornton

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 29, 2002

established law” of excessive force on its head and changes the purpose of qualified immunity in excessive force cases from one of protection for the legitimate use of force into a shield for clearly illegal conduct. … Layne, 526 U.S. 603, 615 (1999) (“‘clearly established’” for purposes of qualified immunity does not mean that “‘an official action is protected by qualified immunity unless the very action in question has previously been

Stanley R. Palowsky, III, Individually, and on Behalf of Alternative Environmental Solutions, Inc. v. Allyson Campbell

Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jun 26, 2019

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 815-19, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2736-39, 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) (allegations of malice are insufficient to overcome qualified immunity). … Conduct, clearly recognizes the dichotomy between adjudicative and administrative duties.

O'MALLEY v. Sheriff of Worcester County

415 Mass. 132 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · May 4, 1993

To overcome the defendants’ qualified immunity, the plaintiffs must show that the defendants directly participated in violating the plaintiffs’ “clearly established” rights. Anderson v. … We hold that, as a matter of law, the plaintiffs’ allegations do not defeat the Commissioner’s qualified immunity.

Nichols v. Lewis Grocer

138 F.3d 563 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 3, 1998

Louisiana Office of Community Services, 47 F.3d 1438, 1444 (5th Cir. 1995) (“A factfinder can infer pretext if it finds that the employee was ‘clearly better qualified’ (as opposed to merely better or as qualified) than … Assuming arguendo that Nichols was indeed prepared to handle the rigors of the night perishables supervisor position, her listed “qualifications” nevertheless do not establish her to be ‘clearly better qualified’ for it

Mathers Ex Rel. J.S.J. v. Wright

636 F.3d 396 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 11, 2011

A state official sued in her individual capacity is entitled to qualified immunity so long as her conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … We next consider whether the equal protection right at issue was clearly established.

Erika Mabes v. Angela McFeeley

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 28, 2025

Both sets of defendants invoked qual- ified immunity, contending that their actions did not violate the Mabeses’ clearly established rights. … Thompson’s en- titlement to qualified immunity naturally follows from the Mabeses’ failure to carry their “burden of demonstrating the violation of a clearly established right.” Forman v.

Anders v. Cuevas

District Court, E.D. Michigan · Oct 8, 2019

They did not argue that Plaintiffs failed to establish a constitutional violation or that Sollars did not violate a clearly established constitutional right. See Rondigo, L.L.C. v. … that violated clearly established law.’”).

Rochon v. City of Angola,et al

122 F.3d 319 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 24, 1997

The first step is to determine whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. … If the court finds no constitutional injury, it need not address the issue of qualified immunity. Quives v. Campbell, 934 F.2d 668, 671 (5th Cir.1991).

Patterson v. Oakes

District Court, E.D. Texas · Mar 30, 2023

immunity without first addressing whether the violation of the right alleged was clearly established. … In their qualified immunity argument, Defendants assert that Plaintiff has not set out a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

Kuhl v. Fields

District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Feb 11, 2025

Kuhl continued to display difficulty speaking clearly and was visibly unsteady. (Doc. # 77- 5 at 39:40-41:25). Mr. … Appx. 481, 482 (6th Cir. 2009) (defendants entitled to qualified immunity because “at the time of the events [], an intoxicated detainee had no clearly established constitutional right to a hospital evaluation in the absence

Erika Mabes v. Angela McFeeley

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 28, 2025

Both sets of defendants invoked qual- ified immunity, contending that their actions did not violate the Mabeses’ clearly established rights. … Thompson’s en- titlement to qualified immunity naturally follows from the Mabeses’ failure to carry their “burden of demonstrating the violation of a clearly established right.” Forman v.

Smith v. Siegelman

322 F.3d 1290 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 28, 2003

The qualified immunity defense may be raised and addressed on a motion to dismiss, and will be granted if the complaint “fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.” Chesser v. … Qualified immunity protects government officials sued 'in their individual capacities as long as their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have