Case law

High v. Fuchs

74 F. App'x 499 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 25, 2003

prohibited and, and therefore, qualified immunity was improper. … We have established that there are two ways in which a plaintiff seeking to overcome the bar of qualified immunity can show that a right was clearly established in the law at the time the alleged violation occurred.

Bruning v. Pixler

949 F.2d 352 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 15, 1991

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), the Court adopted an objective standard for qualified immunity. … alleged conduct violated the law and that that law was clearly established when the alleged violation occurred."

Acevedo-Garcia v. Vera-Monroig

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 17, 2000

changes in work conditions and <br>responsibilities was "clearly established." … clearly enough to reject the <br>qualified immunity defense of the defendants.

Grant v. Riverside Corp.

364 Pa. Super. 593 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 21, 1987

Clearly, from a review of the above criteria, it is not mandatory that a contractor be the general contractor on a construction project to qualify as a statutory employer. … Clearly, this language is distinguishable from our Section 203, in its explicit extension of immunity to all contractors and subcontractors present at the job site and conducting the business of the injured employee’s direct

Weyant v. Okst

101 F.3d 845 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 3, 1996

In general, public officials are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe their acts did not … That version is sharply disputed, and the matter of the officers’ qualified immunity therefore cannot be resolved as a matter of law.

Hamilton v. Cannon

80 F.3d 1525 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 19, 1996

The court also granted Lonnie Brown summary judgment on the section 1983 claims, in his individual capacity, on the ground of qualified immunity. Id. … On appeal, we reversed the district court's denial of qualified immunity to defendants Tookes and Duncan on the section 1983 claims. Hamilton v. Cannon, 80 F.3d 1525, 1532 (11th Cir.1996).

Mejia v. Lafayette Consolidated Government

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Mar 20, 2025

To overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must establish: (1) the official violated a statutory or constitutional right; and (2) the right violated was “clearly established” such that a reasonable person … established for purposes of qualified immunity.!

Eric Darden v. City of Fort Worth, Texas

880 F.3d 722 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 24, 2018

The district court determined that the officers had not violated clearly established law and were thus entitled to qualified immunity. … Once an official pleads qualified immunity, “the burden then shifts to the plaintiff, who must rebut the defense by establishing a genuine fact issue as to whether the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly

Kercado-Clymer v. City of Amsterdam

370 F. App'x 238 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 25, 2010

To be denied summary judgment on qualified immunity, an official must violate clearly established law. Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818. … We conclude that Brownell’s actions, while patently inappropriate, did not violate clearly established law.

Deutsch v. Jordan

618 F.3d 1093 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 24, 2010

But a defendant may be entitled to appeal from a denial of a motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. Id. Qualified immunity is an immunity “from suit rather than a mere defense to liability.” … Deutsch’s testimony was on a matter of public concern, the law to that effect was not clearly established in the summer of 2008 (thus entitling her to qualified immunity).

Smith v. Cupp

430 F.3d 766 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 2, 2005

The district court denied Dunn qualified immunity. … The particular right at issue was clearly established. Thus, Dunn is not entitled to qualified immunity.

Varney v. City of Colorado Springs, Colorado

District Court, D. Colorado · Sep 10, 2024

“In the context of a qualified immunity defense on an unlawful search or arrest claim, [the Court] ascertain[s] whether a defendant violated clearly established law by asking whether there was arguable probable cause … Holmes, 830 F.3d 1123, 1139 (10th Cir. 2016) (recognizing that the “arguable probable cause” inquiry is part of qualified immunity’s second prong—whether the law was clearly established).

Bhattacharya v. Murray, Jr.

District Court, W.D. Virginia · Jul 21, 2022

, because it was not clearly established that the filing of a professionalism concern card—what was in essence a referral for another party to consider discipline that the Plaintiff did not know about—was an adverse action … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Williams v. Jackson

600 F.3d 1007 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 25, 2010

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity generally shields “[g]overnment officials performing discretionary functions . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … established right to be free from such radiation, qualified immunity applies.

Elder v. Holloway

510 U.S. 510 · Supreme Court of the United States · Feb 23, 1994

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials like respondents from damages actions unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law. … Davis , in short, concerned not the authorities a court may consider in determining qualified immunity, but this entirely discrete question: Is qualified immunity defeated where a defendant violates any clearly established

Leroy Duffie v. City of Lincoln

834 F.3d 877 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 23, 2016

“The doctrine of qualified immunity 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 … A state official will be shielded by qualified immunity if (1) the plaintiff fails to allege or show that the official’s conduct violated a constitutional right or (2) the constitutional right was not “ ‘clearly established

Knopf v. Williams

884 F.3d 939 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 5, 2018

He moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity because (1) Mr. Knopf had failed to prove a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) the law was not clearly established at the time of Mr. … Knopf with clearly established law to overcome Mayor Williams's qualified immunity defense.

Kreger-Mueller, Valerie v. Shiner, Justin

District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Sep 9, 2019

Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 424–28 (1976) (explaining the policy rationales that underlie the doctrine of absolute prosecutorial immunity). … Counseling Ctr., 987 F.2d 397, 408–09 (7th Cir. 1993) (discussing relevant case law in context of assessing whether law was clearly established for qualified-immunity purposes).

Stella v. Davis County

District Court, D. Utah · Sep 14, 2022

ANALYSIS To overcome a qualified immunity defense, Plaintiffs must show “(1) a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established.” Prince v. … And, as noted above, that right was clearly established. Accordingly, Anderson is not entitled to qualified immunity. See Prince v.

Fabien Eldridge v. William E. Gibson, David Day, Robert Durham, Michael H. Knowlton, and Sam Lee

332 F.3d 1019 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 19, 2003

Cameron Co., Tex., 274 F.3d 269, 276 (5th Cir.2001) (“It is a well established rule that where a judge’s absolute immunity would protect him from liability for the performance of particular acts, mere allegations that he … Eldridge’s argument that the Thirteenth Judicial District is a “person” subject to suit under § 1983 also fails because, as Judge Haynes discussed, the Thirteenth Judicial District is clearly a branch of the *1022 state and