Case law

Lloyd Dela Cruz v. Kauai County Melvin K. Soong, Prosecuting Attorney for the County of Kauai

279 F.3d 1064 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 6, 2002

The next step in evaluating the claim of qualified immunity, however, is to determine whether this right was “clearly established.” Saucier, 121 S.Ct. at 2156. … Under this standard, Soong is entitled to qualified immunity. Déla Cruz has not met his burden of proving that the right allegedly violated here was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged violation.

Yorzinski v. City of New York

175 F. Supp. 3d 69 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 31, 2016

Qualified Immunity Police officers are immune from liability in § 1983 in suits brought against them in their individual capacities if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … The Second Circuit has explained that “[e]ven whei’e the plaintiffs federal rights and the scope of the official’s permissible conduct are clearly established, the qualified immunity defense protects a government actor if

Sample v. Bailey

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 9, 2005

Clearly Established Right Having established that there was a constitutional violation, we turn to the second step of the qualified immunity analysis — whether the constitutional right at issue was clearly established … qualified immunity.

Mark A. Campbell v. Kevin Kallas

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 19, 2019

As relevant here, the judge rejected the claim of qualified immunity, concluding that caselaw clearly established a constitutional right to effective medical treatment. We reverse. … Because no case clearly establishes that denying treatment beyond hormone therapy is unconstitu- tional, qualified immunity applies regardless.

Riggleman v. Clarke

District Court, W.D. Virginia · Sep 4, 2024

Amonette’s actions amounted to deliberate indifference and turn directly to … the clearly established prong of the qualified-immunity analysis.” 55 F.4th at 454. … The Fourth Circuit did not address whether the defendant was entitled to qualified immunity, or specifically the second step of the qualified immunity framework—whether the right at issue was “clearly established” at the

Richey v. American Automobile Association, Inc.

380 Mass. 835 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jun 6, 1980

There may, indeed, be room for the observation that if the present facts should be held to qualify a discharged employee for relief, then a new practical definition might have to be given to employments theoretically terminable

Doe v. Woodard

912 F.3d 1278 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 3, 2019

We reversed the district court’s grant of qualified immunity. … I first address the “clearly established” prong. McCoy v. Meyers, 887 F.3d 1034, 1045 (10th Cir. 2018) (“Courts have discretion to decide the order in which to engage the two qualified immunity prongs.”

Joe Richardson Jr v. Oakland County Animal Shelter

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 10, 2020

“An official has qualified immunity from suits under 42 USC 1983 when the official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … question was clearly established, to analyze first).

Stearns v. Clarkson

615 F.3d 1278 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 13, 2010

Clearly Established Rights The district court correctly noted that the rights at issue in this case are clearly established. … Because the rights at issue in this case are clearly established, the defendants are only entitled to qualified immunity if, based on the facts as viewed in the light most favorable to Mr.

Scarpino v. Grosshiem

852 F. Supp. 798 · District Court, S.D. Iowa · Apr 13, 1994

Qualified immunity. Defendants assert they are entitled to qualified immunity as to the individual plaintiffs’ claims for damages. … Qualified immunity from liability for civil damages is available if the law as it applied to the relevant facts was not clearly established and if a reasonable official could have believed his or her conduct was lawful.

Buonocore v. Harris

65 F.3d 347 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Sep 12, 1995

established’ for qualified immunity purposes.” … They do broadly assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the right “allegedly violated” was not “clearly established.” Appellants’ Brief at 20 (emphasis added).

Rohan for Rohan v. Exxon Corp.

896 F. Supp. 666 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 7, 1995

Thus, DOHSA clearly supplies the applicable law in this wrongful death case. In Miles v. … The same analysis applies to claims for mental anguish, which are clearly non-pecuniary in nature.

Orozco v. Sandoval County

District Court, D. New Mexico · Aug 27, 2020

clearly established. … Therefore, in light of Plaintiff's failure to cite to clearly established law, the Court holds that Edwards is entitled to qualified immunity.

Lusk v. Arne

District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · May 2, 2022

The defendants present no argument as to why they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Farnham, 394 F.3d 496, 485 (7th Cir. 2005) (rejecting qualified immunity defense because it is clearly established that refusing to provide an inmate with his inhaler while he was experiencing breathing problems was a constitutional

Winfield v. State

172 Vt. 591 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Jun 8, 2001

Thus, if the official’s conduct does not violate clearly-established rights of which a reasonable person would have known, the official is protected by qualified immunity from tort liability. Cook v. … Assessed in light of these standards, the trial court’s ruling on the issue of qualified immunity was sound.

Fredrick K. Koch v. Town of Brattleboro, Vermont, Sherwood D. Lake, Jr., and John Doe, Unidentified Brattleboro Police Officer

287 F.3d 162 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 29, 2002

Because the law on that question is not clearly established, the Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. Therefore, we AFFIRM the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Defendants. I. … Therefore, Koch cannot point to a “clearly established right” that Lake and Holbrook violated in order to break the officers’ qualified immunity and survive the summary judgment motion. 3.

Joan Gruenke, Individually and as Parent and Natural Guardian of Leah Gruenke, a Minor v. Michael Seip

225 F.3d 290 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 21, 2000

When the defendant violates a clearly established right about which a reasonable person would have known, he is not entitled to qualified immunity. See, e.g., Parkhurst v. … to qualified immunity.

Tommy D. Hopkins v. John L. Saunders

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 23, 1996

Qualified Immunity Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are generally immune from suit in performing discretionary duties if "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … The district court determined, however, that the right to such a hearing was clearly established by section 105.055 and thus denied the officials qualified immunity. We disagree.

Kantamanto v. King

651 F. Supp. 2d 313 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 2, 2009

Thus, the Court must turn to the remaining prong of qualified immunity analysis: “whether ... defendant [North] is entitled to qualified immunity on the grounds that his conduct did ‘not violate clearly established statutory … The fact that the right is clearly established, however, does not end the qualified immunity analysis in the First Amendment retaliation context.

Dolihite v. Maughon

74 F.3d 1027 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 23, 1996

The qualified immunity analysis requires the court to determine whether a defendant violated clearly established constitutional law. 21 In Harlow v. … is insufficient to clearly establish the law for purposes of overcoming the appellants’ qualified immunity claims in this ease. 23 In determining whether the appellants in this case are entitled to qualified immunity, we