Case law

Anmarie Calgaro v. St. Louis County

919 F.3d 1054 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 25, 2019

Nor is it clearly established that parents have a constitutional right to manage all details of their children’s education or to obtain consultation with school officials on everyday … Because existing precedent does not clearly establish the rights that Calgaro asserts, Johnson is entitled to qualified immunity. Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731, 741 (2011).

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.

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.

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).

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.

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

Walter Dartland v. Metropolitan Dade County, a Political Subdivision of the State of Florida, Sergio Pereira

866 F.2d 1321 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 27, 1989

Pereira moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. The district court denied the motion. The Supreme Court formed the principle of qualified immunity in Harlow v. … “The words ‘clearly established ... constitutional rights’ may not be used to read the defense of immunity out of federal tort law by the facile expedient of stating constitutional rights in the most general possible terms

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.

Worley v. Ewing

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 12, 2020

established right to overcome qualified immunity, purpose rather than knowledge is required...”). … Because Worley’s Amended Complaint fails to state a plausible violation of any clearly established constitutional right by these defendants, I FIND that they are entitled to qualified immunity on Worley’s claims against

Post v. City of Fort Lauderdale

7 F.3d 1552 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 9, 1993

Defendants are, at least, entitled to qualified immunity because no facts before us show defendants violated clearly established law. See Lindsey v. … Hurley is entitled to qualified immunity because Hurley's acts, as established by the record before us, violated no clearly established law. C.

Jane Doe v. Village of Arlington Heights

782 F.3d 911 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 13, 2015

Qualified immunity shields a govern- ment official from liability for damages when the official’s “conduct does not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Walker, 740 F.3d 1088, 1095–97 (7th Cir. 2014) (holding that the plaintiff failed to establish a clearly estab- lished right and the district court erred in denying the de- fendants’ motion to dismiss on qualified immunity

Aponte-Matos v. Toledo-Davila

135 F.3d 182 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 4, 1998

Qualified immunity protects both federal and state officials from liability for damages in a civil rights action if "a reasonable officer could have believed [his actions] to be lawful, in light of clearly established … is qualified immunity.

Newell v. Sauser

79 F.3d 115 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 11, 1996

The qualified immunity doctrine 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 … Analysis of a claim of qualified immunity entails three steps: “(1) the identification of the specific right allegedly violated; (2) the determination of whether that right was so ‘clearly established’ as to alert a reasonable

Orozco v. County of Yolo

814 F. Supp. 885 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 24, 1993

Officers are entitled to qualified immunity if their conduct did not violate plaintiffs’ clearly established statutory or constitutional rights or if the officers could reasonably have believed that their conduct was lawful … Alternatively, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity if they prove that a reasonable officer possessing the same information could have believed that the conduct at issue was reasonable in light of the clearly established

William Lund v. City of Rockford, Illinois

956 F.3d 938 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 20, 2020

But even if Nieves did not apply retroactively, Lund still could not prevail, as the defendant officers were entitled to qualified immunity. … Police officers are entitled to qualified immunity under section 1983 unless they “violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” Reichle v.

Murray v. White

155 Vt. 621 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Jan 18, 1991

It is thus hard to consider it as having created clearly established law. … To so require would undermine the very purpose of qualified immunity — allowing an official to act without fear of suit unless she should know that what she is doing is in violation of clearly established rights — because

Woodward v. Weber County

District Court, D. Utah · Mar 27, 2024

QUALIFIED-IMMUNITY ANALYSIS: CLEARLY ESTABLISHED PRONG Due to Defendant's assertion of a qualified-immunity defense, Plaintiff is burdened with showing that Defendant Sampson transgressed his clearly established … Qualified-Immunity Summary Plaintiff has not carried his burden under the second prong of his qualified-immunity requirements in that he has not shown clearly established law supports his constitutional

Julian J. Miller v. Albert Gonzalez

761 F.3d 822 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 5, 2014

As will be clear from the discussion that follows, Miller’s right to be free from the type of force Gonzalez applied was “clearly established,” such that Gonzalez is not entitled to qualified immunity. See Abbott v. … And as the cases cited above demonstrate, this was clearly established at the time of Miller’s arrest.

Rappa v. Hollins

991 F. Supp. 367 · District Court, D. Delaware · Dec 30, 1997

Standard of Review for Qualified Immunity 3 In Harlow v. … The dissenting judge on the issue of qualified immunity argued that the line of harassment cases did clearly establish such harassment was unlawful and that the policy-based termination line of cases did not apply.

Chandler v. Secretary of the Florida Department of Transportation

695 F.3d 1194 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 19, 2012

Consequently, qualified immunity is denied. We review de novo the district court’s denial of the motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds. See Long v. Slaton, 508 F.3d 576, 579 (11th Cir.2007). II. … violation of a clearly established law.