Case law

Taylor v. Barkes

25 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 305 · Supreme Court of the United States · Jun 1, 2015

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statu- tory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … Because, at the very least, petitioners were not contraven- ing clearly established law, they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Omar Ex Rel. Cannon v. Lindsey

334 F.3d 1246 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 26, 2003

PER CURIAM: This is an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a motion to dismiss on the grounds of qualified immunity.

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

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

Robert Wilson v. David Spain

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 5, 2000

established. … fell swoop 3 Since the right to be free from excessive force in the context of an arrest has been clearly established for some time, other circuits have simply held that, in excessive-force cases, the qualified-immunity

Hershel Rosenbaum v. Washoe County

663 F.3d 1071 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 30, 2011

, whether that right was clearly established at the time of the event. … WASHOE COUNTY qualified immunity where “every reasonable official” would have understood that he was violating a clearly established right (emphasis added) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).2 In this case

Ashker v. Schwarzenegger

339 F. App'x 751 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 30, 2009

McGrath is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. See Brosseau v. … Haugen, 543 U.S. 194, 198 , 125 S.Ct. 596 , 160 L.Ed.2d 583 (2004) (holding officer entitled to immunity “[i]f the law at the time did not clearly establish that the officer’s conduct would violate the Constitution”).

Walden v. City of Seattle

77 Wash. App. 784 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 3, 1995

In an action under § 1983, government employees, including police officers, are afforded qualified immunity under federal law unless, in the performance of discretionary duties, their conduct violated " 'clearly established … Thus, entitlement to qualified immunity may be established as a matter of law on a motion for summary judgment or for a directed verdict. Robinson v. Seattle, 119 Wn.2d 34 , 830 P.2d 318 , cert. denied, 113 S.

Golino v. City of New Haven

761 F. Supp. 962 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Apr 18, 1991

, the issue of qualified immunity can be decided on a motion for summary judgment. … Accordingly, defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity is denied. Whether defendants are entitled to qualified immunity is ultimately a question of law for the court to decide.

Coggins v. Buonora

776 F.3d 108 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 13, 2015

In addition to his absolute immunity claims, Buonora also challenges on appeal the district court’s denial of qualified immunity.. … Qualified immunity protects public officials from civil liability only “if (a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant to believe that his action

Hydrick v. Hunter

466 F.3d 676 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 1, 2006

To defeat qualified immunity, “the right allegedly violated must be defined at the appropriate level of specificity before a court can determine if it was clearly established.” Wilson v. … Thus, there are two bodies of law from which we might draw “clearly established” law for qualified immunity purposes: first, where the SVPs claim a violation of a right that is clearly established even in the prison context

Chavez v. The Board of County Commissioners of the County of Chaves

District Court, D. New Mexico · Jan 31, 2020

basis of qualified immunity.” … The individual defendants assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the law is not clearly established. Mot. at 19–23 (relying on Springer v. Albin, 398 F.

Puller v. Baca

781 F.3d 1190 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 20, 2015

When a defendant asserts qualified immunity, as Detective Baca does here, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish (1) a violation of a constitutional right (2) that was clearly established. Id. … Ultimately, “the record must clearly demonstrate the plaintiff has satisfied his heavy two-part burden; otherwise, the defendant[] is entitled to qualified immunity.” Id.

Jerry Lawler v. Hardeman Cnty., Tenn.

93 F.4th 919 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 16, 2024

Qualified immunity shields public officials from the time and expense of a trial unless their actions infringed “clearly established” rules that a “reasonable person” would have understood. … The changes do not affect our resolution because Lawler’s father must overcome qualified immunity’s “clearly established” prong.

Jafet Castro-Reyes v. German Bosque

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 6, 2026

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory … immunity under the clearly established law of this Circuit.

White v. Pauly

26 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 409 · Supreme Court of the United States · Jan 9, 2017

All three officers moved for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. … Qualified immunity attaches when an official's conduct " 'does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.' " Mullenix v.

Ashker v. Schwarzenegger

339 F. App'x 751 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 30, 2009

McGrath is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. See Brosseau v. … Haugen, 543 U.S. 194, 198 , 125 S.Ct. 596 , 160 L.Ed.2d 583 (2004) (holding officer entitled to immunity “[i]f the law at the time did not clearly establish that the officer’s conduct would violate the Constitution”).

Livant v. Clifton

272 F. App'x 113 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 7, 2008

Government officials performing discretionary functions are generally granted qualified immunity and are “shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … They are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their conduct does not violate “clearly established” rights of which a reasonable person would have known, id.

Craig Singletary v. MO Dept. of Correct

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 14, 2005

Texas Tech Univ., 80 F.3d 1042, 1046 (5th Cir. 1996) (holding that Texas Tech and Texas Tech employees enjoy Eleventh Amendment immunity and qualified immunity respectively against § 1981 claims); Mitchell v. … Dept., 297 F.3d 751, 759 (8th Cir. 2002) (surveying the law and concluding that it was "clearly established" that at-will employees could sue for employment discrimination under § 1981).

Neal-Lomax v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

574 F. Supp. 2d 1170 · District Court, D. Nevada · Sep 2, 2008

Even if Rader’s use of force was constitutionally unreasonable, Rader is entitled to qualified immunity. … The plaintiff bears the burden of showing that the right at issue was clearly established. Sorrels, 290 F.3d at 969 .