Case law

Bryant v. CEO DeKalb Co.

575 F.3d 1281 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 31, 2009

clearly established under § 1981. … Furthermore, even if Drew’s misguided interpretation of the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity test was correct, it is well-established in this circuit that claims for retaliation are cognizable pursuant

Patterson v. United States of America

999 F. Supp. 2d 300 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 19, 2013

The Qualified Immunity Doctrine At the motion to dismiss stage, a plaintiff must allege sufficient facts to establish that the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. See Bloem, 920 F. … immunity grounds, because the relevant right is not “clearly established” or otherwise, cannot be accepted.

Thomas v. Bracey

940 S.W.2d 340 · Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · Feb 12, 1997

To grant immunity short of absolute privilege to communications relating to pending or proposed litigation, and thus subject an attorney to liability for defamation, might tend to lessen an attorney’s efforts on behalf of … The letter was clearly written in an effort to secure the rights of appellee’s client, the executor of the estate, in property and income belonging to the estate.

Peter M. Garvie v. Charles O. Jackson and George W. Wheeler

845 F.2d 647 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 27, 1988

“[Defendants] have qualified immunity unless plaintiffs’ ‘rights were so clearly established when the acts were committed that any officer in the defendant’s position, measured objectively, would have clearly un *650 derstood … The relevant inquiry for this court, in light of defendants’ claim of qualified immunity, is whether Garvie’s asserted property interest was clearly established.

Robinson v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

858 F. Supp. 2d 33 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 1, 2012

because plaintiff has failed to establish a prima facie case of negligence. … Only discretionary activity is protected by sovereign immunity. Id.

Anthony W. Barton v. Mark Norrod and Randy Pack, Individually

106 F.3d 1289 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 31, 1997

A determination of whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity focuses on the objective legal reasonableness of the official’s action in light of clearly established law. Ibid. … Thus, even were we to disagree with Stockwell’s holding, it entitles Norrod to qualified immunity because it establishes that failure to comply with extradition procedures is not a clearly established right in this circuit

Johnson, et.al. v. Williamson

195 F.3d 1208 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 1, 1999

Williamson also argued that they were entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiffs had failed to allege that they had violated clearly established law. … As a result, they maintain, the district court erred in concluding that the law was clearly established and in rejecting their arguments that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Vander Zee v. Reno

73 F.3d 1365 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 2, 1996

established as to overcome the defense of qualified immunity. … established constitutional right which would overcome a qualified immunity defense.

McLean v. Mississippi State University

District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Jul 14, 2020

Thomas, 843 F.3d 172, 177 (Sth Cir. 2016) (“Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right.”) (quoting Mace y. … Qualified immunity calls for a bifurcated test in which the court must first determine (1) “whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established

Loughlin v. Tweed

310 F.R.D. 323 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Oct 1, 2015

Tweed contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Tweed responds that he is entitled to qualified immunity because his conduct was not objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law at the time.

Boles v. Neet

486 F.3d 1177 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 24, 2007

W hile a defendant charged with a constitutional violation receives qualified immunity when the right asserted is not clearly established, the right that has been established does not have to [be] so fact … Was the Constitutional Right Clearly Established?

David Greene and Starna Hill v. William B. Reeves, A/K/A Brad Reeves (95-5586) Robert G. Stephens (95-5644) Thomas J. Smith, III (95-5643)

80 F.3d 1101 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 8, 1996

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials acting in their official capacities are protected from being sued in their individual capacities for damages if their actions did not “violate clearly established … When a defendant moves for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, as the officials in this case did, the plaintiff must therefore 1) identify a clearly established right alleged to have been violated; and 2) establish

Byrd v. Harrell

48 F.4th 343 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 31, 2022

When a government official has asserted qualified immunity, “the burden shifts to the plaintiff to ‘rebut the defense by establishing that the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law … Ct. 548, 552 (2017) (noting that the purpose of qualified immunity’s clearly-established prong is to “giv[e] fair and clear warning to officers” about what conduct will expose them to liability).

LaToya Benton v. Seth Layton

139 F.4th 281 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 3, 2025

The court found that Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity under both the constitutional and clearly established prongs. Benton v. Layton, 675 F. Supp. 3d 606, 623 (E.D. Va. 2023). … Therefore, we hold that Defendants are independently entitled to qualified immunity under the clearly established prong. 9 IV.

Kyle Ciminillo v. Thomas Streicher Daniel Hills Richard Janke, Gerald Knight City of Cincinnati

434 F.3d 461 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 17, 2006

Even though Ciminillo alleges facts that, if true, would constitute a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights, Knight may still be entitled to qualified immunity unless those rights were “clearly established” at the time … Given Yates, Adams, and Deorle, it was clearly established that shooting Ciminillo with a beanbag was objectively unreasonable. Thus, Knight is not entitled to qualified immunity. C.

Culberson v. Clay County

District Court, N.D. Mississippi · May 10, 2023

Clifton, 29 F.3d 1012 (5th Cir. 1994) (holding that law enforcement officers are entitled to qualified immunity “unless it is shown that, at the time of the incident, [the officer] violated a clearly established constitutional … Villarreal, 628 F.3d 209, 211-12 (5th Cir. 2010) (“the plaintiff has the burden to rebut this [qualified immunity] defense by establishing that the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law”

Day v. Idaho Transportation Department

Idaho Supreme Court · Aug 14, 2023

Auth., 124 Idaho 450, 463, 860 P.2d 653, 666 (1993) (“[E]ven though the district 14 court did not explicitly address the qualified immunity issue in responding to Worrell … ’s motions to dismiss and post-trial motions, it is implicit in the court’s rulings that it rejected Worrell’s properly raised immunity claims.”).

Christian Cutler v. Stephen F. Austin State Univ

767 F.3d 462 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 15, 2014

Cutler insists that the district court correctly stated the clearly established law. Yet, the district court relies on a single case for establishing a clearly established right. See Cutler v. … Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 269–71 (1964), for the clearly established law.

Fuqua v. Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 4, 2025

Because the officers moved to dismiss based on qualified immunity, we must determine whether Fuqua plausibly alleges a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. … Clearly Established Right To overcome qualified immunity, Fuqua must also show that the officers violated a clearly established right. Lincoln, 880 F.3d at 537.

Cady Ex Rel. Estate of Galambos v. Walsh

753 F.3d 348 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jun 4, 2014

The three defendants now appeal, arguing that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Finally, the defendants' objection to the district court's analysis of whether the constitutional rights in play were "clearly established" also does not transform this appeal into one that turns on a pure