Case law

Sims v. Morton

421 U.S. 908 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 14, 1975

Mccarthy v. Mayo

827 F.2d 1310 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 30, 1987

But a governmental official has immunity for discretionary acts so long as those acts do not violate a clearly established constitutional right. Harlow v. … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) (qualified immunity available where the right violated was not clearly established at the time the act took place). 18 McCarthy alleges that the defendants' conspiracy

Hurlman v. Rice

927 F.2d 74 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 4, 1991

The qualified immunity enjoyed by police officers protects them against a suit for damages “ ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982)), or, where the rights were clearly established, insofar as it was objectively reasonable to believe that their acts did not violate those rights

Mulligan v. Rioux

229 Conn. 716 · Supreme Court of Connecticut · Jun 28, 1994

In accordance with this established precedent, the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law only if, on the facts found, their conduct either did not violate “clearly established rights” of which … Fountain, supra, *742 915 F.2d 823 (“to establish the qualified immunity-defense, a police officer must satisfy one of two tests: either that his [or her] conduct did not violate ‘clearly established rights’ of which a reasonable

Esparza v. Manley

District Court, E.D. Missouri · Feb 18, 2022

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in a § 1983 action unless their conduct violates a clearly established right of which a reasonable official would have known.” Burnikel v. … established is sufficient for qualified immunity.

Harnage

District Court, D. Connecticut · Jun 15, 2026

“Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly … “‘Even if the right was clearly established,’ a court can still find a suit blocked by qualified immunity where ‘it was objectively reasonable for the officer to believe the conduct at issue was lawful.’”

Christopher Sample v. Jason Bailey

409 F.3d 689 · 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. … to qualified immunity.

Hattie Tanner v. David Walters

98 F.4th 726 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 15, 2024

Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from civil liability “when their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a  No. … “When a defendant invokes qualified immunity in a motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must offer sufficient evidence to create a genuine dispute of fact that the defendant violated a clearly established right.”

Charles Wade v. Gordon Lewis

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 17, 2021

Thus, he contends that the law was not clearly established, and the district court erred in denying him qualified immunity. … In reversing the district court’s denial of qualified immunity and analyzing whether there was clearly established law, we distinguished Aldridge.

Pritchett v. Alford

973 F.2d 307 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 19, 1992

Immunity may thus be established either on the basis that the right allegedly (or actually) violated was not at the time one “clearly established,” or that, though “clearly established” (and violated), it was one that a “ … But as earlier noted, a specific prior adjudication of right is not necessary to make it one “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes.

Berry v. Texas Woman's University

District Court, E.D. Texas · Mar 25, 2021

on qualified immunity[.]” … “[G]eneral propositions of law defined at ‘high levels of generality’ are insufficient to define clearly established law for purposes of defeating qualified immunity.” Perniciaro v.

Burnard v. Oregon Sate Hospital

District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 3, 2025

For that reason, assuming Plaintiffs somehow stated a claim, Defendants would still be entitled to qualified immunity. See Kisela v. … Hughes, 584 U.S. 100, 104 (2018) (“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.”)

Russell v. Butcher

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jul 17, 2020

Barring a showing by Plaintiff that Defendants violated a “clearly established right or law” with respect to hiring, training, and developing procedures, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on claims involving … ” ; , 556 U.S. at 677 (“[i]n the context of determining whether there is a violation of a clearly established right to overcome qualified immunity, purpose rather than knowledge is required...”).

BARGE v. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 31, 2025

Stated more generally: once the defendants have started things off by raising qualified immunity, who has to come forward and show what the “clearly established” law actually is? … If he does not come forward with sufficiently on-point indications that the relevant law is “clearly established,” then the defendant gets qualified immunity. See Davis v.

Branch v. Tunnell

937 F.2d 1382 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 27, 1991

Tunnell is false and unsubstantiated. 8 On October 3, 1988, Tunnell moved to dismiss Branch's suit on grounds of qualified immunity, arguing that under the objective qualified immunity standard established by the Supreme … C 23 Under this heightened pleading standard, we conclude that Branch's complaint fails adequately to allege a violation of clearly established rights under Franks.

Paul Stephens v. Nick Degiovanni, individually

852 F.3d 1298 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 30, 2017

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages for torts committed while performing discretionary duties unless their conduct violates a clearly established … “Concrete facts are generally necessary 14 “In this circuit, the law can be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S.

Rebecca Buddenberg v. Robert Weisdack

939 F.3d 732 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 20, 2019

As relevant here, Budzik argued that he was entitled to qualified immunity because Buddenberg’s complaint failed to allege facts establishing a violation of a clearly established First Amendment right. … “When a defendant appeals the denial of a motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity, we review de novo whether the complaint alleges [a] violation of a clearly established constitutional right.” Id.

Maxwell v. Outagamie County

District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Feb 6, 2023

But that articulation of the relevant clearly established principle is the sort of overly general statement that the Supreme Court has repeatedly found insufficient to overcome qualified immunity. … He was likewise entitled to qualified immunity with respect to his delay in calling for emergency medical help because existing caselaw did not clearly establish an obligation to call for medical help immediately.

Brittany A. Karels v. Gabriel A. Storz

906 F.3d 740 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 15, 2018

Qualified immunity shields a law enforcement officer from liability in a § 1983 action “unless (1) the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to [the plaintiff], establishes a violation of a constitutional or statutory … We may not “define clearly established law at a high level of generality,” but rather must determine “whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.” Id.

Ricciuti v. Transit Authority

124 F.3d 123 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 21, 1997

To recover on that ground, of course, a plaintiff must still overcome the hurdle of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity is unavailable where, as here, the action violates an accused's clearly established constitutional rights, and no reasonably competent police officer could believe otherwise. Anderson v.