Case law

Hawker v. Sandy City Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 5, 2014

“When a defendant asserts qualified immunity at summary judgment, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right and (2) the constitutional right was clearly established … But because the Supreme Court has broken down the burden of plaintiffs in a qualified immunity case into two prongs—a constitutional violation and clearly established law—courts often mistakenly grant qualified immunity to

Kruse v. State of Hawaii

857 F. Supp. 741 · District Court, D. Hawaii · Jul 11, 1994

Common sense dictates that a right cannot be both “clearly established” and “previously undecided” for qualified immunity purposes. … established in order to deny qualified immunity.

Ghaith v. Rauschenberger

778 F. Supp. 2d 787 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 10, 2011

“Qualified immunity provides ‘that government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … “was clearly established at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.”

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.”

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.

Torchinsky v. Siwinski

942 F.2d 257 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 9, 1991

The basic purposes of qualified immunity bear repeating. … This objective test involves an inquiry into whether a government official has violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

Town of Port Deposit v. Petetit

113 Md. App. 401 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 30, 1997

Whether a defendant possesses a qualified immunity is ultimately an issue of law for the court to determine. … of an absolute immunity defense or a Harlow type of qualified immunity defense; the issues would be legal ones.

Randell v. Davis

986 F.2d 1419 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 17, 1993

Belsito Communications, Inc. v. Decker

845 F.3d 13 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Dec 23, 2016

ISSUES INVOLVING BLACKDEN On the qualified-immunity front, our combatants battle over whether Trooper Decker violated clearly-established Fourth- and First-Amendment law. … At qualified-immunity's second step, Blackden must show that clearly-established law in August 2010 would have put Trooper Decker on clear notice of his potential First-Amendment liability.

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.”).