Case law

Ex Parte Juan Antonio Molina Valencia v. .

Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · Apr 17, 2024

App. 2013) (“[A]n issue of first impression can sometimes qualify for mandamus relief when the factual scenario has never been precisely addressed but the principle of law has been clearly established.”). … ); Weeks, 391 S.W.3d at 122 (holding mandamus relief is available if “the principle of law has been clearly established”).

Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission v. Bowen

410 Md. 287 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 26, 2009

Although Dawkins did not expressly delineate legislative immunity, such immunity claims clearly fall within the language in Dawkins of “any other type of immunity.” … When a qualified immunity claim is not defeated by malice or some other factor which might defeat qualified immunity, the two types of immunity claims are the same and are reviewable on appeal from an adverse final judgment

People of Michigan v. Dametrius Benjamin Posey

Michigan Supreme Court · Jul 31, 2023

immunity rather than complete immunity applies where the prosecutor is acting as a police officer and not in the role of an advocate) (quotation marks and citation omitted). … The lead opinion does not address this important qualifier.

Derrick Bunkley v. City of Detroit, Mich.

902 F.3d 552 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 29, 2018

Qualified immunity shields government officials in the performance of discretionary functions from standing trial for civil liability unless their actions violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would … was clearly established.

Bowden v. Snider

District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 23, 2024

What is more, the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. … Cortesluna, 595 U.S. 1, 5 (2021) (A right is clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity “when it is sufficiently clear that every reasonable officer would have understood that what he is doing violates that

Anderson v. Creighton

483 U.S. 635 · Supreme Court of the United States · Jun 25, 1987

action is a violation) violates a clearly established right. … As we noted before, Harlow clearly expressed the understanding that the general principle of qualified immunity it established would be applied “across the board.”

Hunter v. Smith

District Court, E.D. Texas · Aug 14, 2025

As plaintiff failed to present competent summary-judgment evidence showing that defendants violated a clearly established constitutional right, the magistrate judge found that defendants were entitled to qualified … Fite, 47 F.4th 402, 408 (5th Cir. 2022) (granting qualified immunity when plaintiff “fails to iden- tify a single case to support” a clearly established right (quotation marks omitted)).

Pugh v. Mooney

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 23, 2024

Pugh also cites several cases discussing qualified immunity to argue that sovereign immunity does not apply. These cases are inapposite. Sovereign immunity and qualified immunity are distinct concepts. … Children & Youth Servs., 577 F.3d 186, 191 (3d Cir. 2009) (“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

David Mogard v. City of Milbank

932 F.3d 1184 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 8, 2019

Id. at 523 (granting defendants qualified immunity on § 1983 First Amendment retaliation claim because it was not clearly established that plaintiff’s termination violated his First Amendment rights). … In a qualified immunity summary judgment appeal, this court may consider whether the facts viewed most favorably to the nonmovant constitute a violation of clearly established law. Id.

Rocky Lynn Thompson v. Timothy Zimmerman and D.F. Peninger, Benton County Jailors, in Their Official and Individual Capacities

350 F.3d 734 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 1, 2003

We further conclude that the constitutional right asserted by Thompson — the right to be free from excessive force — was clearly established on the date of Thompson’s arrest and alleged beating. See Guite v. … Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment based on qualified immunity, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

STILE v. HOLLINGSWORTH

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 29, 2021

assuming Plaintiff’s allegations to be true and determining whether the claim was supported by clearly established law. … Ed. 2d 463 (2017) (explaining that clearly established law, for purposes of qualified immunity, must make apparent the unlawfulness of the conduct that violates the Constitution).

Petrello v. City of Manchester, et al.

2017 DNH 053 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Mar 21, 2017

of particular conduct is clearly established.’” … Officer Brandreth argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity on this claim because any First Amendment right he allegedly violated was not clearly established at that time.

McKennon v. District Attorney's Office (Lawrenceburg, TN)

District Court, M.D. Tennessee · May 31, 2023

Qualified Immunity 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.”

Barrett v. City of Pelahatchie, Mississippi

District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Mar 17, 2023

Unless the public official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right, he is cloaked with qualified immunity. (citing Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 640 (1987)). … to “rebut this defense by establishing that the official's allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law.”).

Andre Johnson v. Jeremy Moseley

790 F.3d 649 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 2, 2015

Page 2 of clearly established federal law. … “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.” Mitchell v.

Butler v. Woods

District Court, N.D. California · Nov 28, 2022

Qualified Immunity. Finally, the defendants argue that Bellas and Woods are protected by qualified immunity. … Epps, 659 F.3d 440, 447 (Sth Cir. 2011) (analyzing, as part of qualified immunity, whether the defendant’s “failure to promulgate [a] policy was objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law”).

Vermette v. Ludwig

707 So. 2d 742 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 10, 1997

As to the § 1983 claims, the officers grounded their summary judgment motion on an assertion of qualified immunity from suit. … If the public official's conduct did not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right, the official is immune." Stephens, 702 So.2d at 526 .

Kenneth L. Erickson v. United States of America Bryon Simon Douglas Hebert Kenneth Ingleby Charles Hill

976 F.2d 1299 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 7, 1992

In addition, the individually named defendants would be qualifiedly immune as there was no clearly established constitutional principle prohibiting the acts alleged by the plaintiff.” … We have divided the qualified immunity analysis into three inquiries: (1) the identification of the specific right allegedly violated; (2) the determination of whether that right was so “clearly established” as to alert a

Scott v. Quigley

District Court, D. Nevada · Apr 29, 2025

While the Court decides 17 as a matter of law the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis, only 18 the jury can decide the disputed factual issues. See Morales v. … Cal. 25 2012) (police officer entitled to qualified immunity because constitutional informational 26 privacy right was not clearly established); O'Phelan v.

Chen v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 9, 2011

were clearly established at the time the action was taken” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). … A defendant’s entitlement to qualified immunity is a question of law to be decided by the court, see id., although sometimes, as in this case, the facts establishing what the challenged conduct was are legitimately in dispute