Case law

In Re Copley Press, Inc.

518 F.3d 1022 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 4, 2008

United States, 873 F.2d 1210, 1213 (9th Cir.1989), though logic alone, even without experience, may be enough to establish the right. See Seattle Times Co. v. U.S. Dist. … The court didn't clearly err in so finding and, in light of that finding, its decision to unseal these portions of the documents was not an abuse of discretion.

Ronda Rae Jones v. Steven Naert

121 F.4th 558 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 12, 2024

To overcome Officer Steven Naert’s qualified-immunity defense, Ronda Jones must show not just that Naert violated the Constitution but also that the existing law clearly established this violation. … Rather, I would jump straight to the second qualified-immunity element: Naert did not violate clearly established law by concluding that he had probable cause to arrest Jones. See Beck v.

Freeman v. Blair

862 F.2d 1330 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 14, 1988

A. of our earlier decision, in which we held that Blair and Massa are not entitled to absolute immunity. See 793 F.2d at 171-73. We turn to the issues of qualified immunity. … Consequently, we must conclude that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity with respect to this claim.

United States v. Ledford (Geneva Saylor)

991 F.2d 797 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 6, 1993

Nelson Edwards v. Michael Jolliff-Blake

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 1, 2018

  that  constitutional  right  was  clearly  established  at  the  time  of  the  alleged  violation.”  …   immunity);  Junkert,  610 F.3d at 370 (concluding officers were entitled to qualified  immunity based on  their reasonable  belief that  the  affidavit  established probable cause even though it left “much to be de‐ sired”)

Daniels v. D'AURIZO

564 F. Supp. 2d 194 · District Court, W.D. New York · Jul 9, 2008

Nevertheless, I find that even if probable cause was lacking or questionable, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields public officials from an action for civil damages, to the extent that their challenged acts do not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

Hudson v. Vasquez

941 S.W.2d 334 · Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Feb 6, 1997

In order to establish the “good faith” element of his claim to summary judgment based on official immunity, Hudson was required to prove that a reasonably prudent police officer could have believed that the force used was … The state law standard for analyzing the “good faith” element of official immunity is “derived substantially from the test that has emerged under federal immunity law for claims of qualified immunity in section 1983 cases

Beier v. City of Lewiston

354 F.3d 1058 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 14, 2004

The Supreme Court reasoned that the consequences of such an argument would be “intolerable,” because the qualified immunity right would be easily defeated as long as the complaint alleges violation of one clearly established … Clearly Established Right “ ‘[C]learly established’ for purposes of qualified immunity means that ‘[t]he contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates

Greg Myers, Etc. v. R. Kathleen Morris, Scott County Attorney, Etc.

810 F.2d 1437 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 9, 1987

of clearly established legal norms. … If they do, however, defendants Johnson, Ma-nahan and Walling are shielded by qualified immunity from further litigation of these claims in the absence of any identified legal duty to behave otherwise or any clearly established

Deshawn Gervin v. Pamela Florence

139 F.4th 1236 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 9, 2025

Second, we leave the dis- cussion of qualified immunity for later. … I also agree that the Pro- bation Officer Defendants cannot claim qualified immunity.

Bledsoe v. Board Cty Comm. Jefferson KS

53 F.4th 589 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 15, 2022

was clearly established. … The majority cites Shaw, without further elaboration, to hold that Appellants “are entitled to qualified immunity on Bledsoe’s failure-to-intervene claim because such a claim was not clearly established in 1999.”

Ullery v. Bradley

949 F.3d 1282 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 10, 2020

Defendant qualified immunity. … Defendant instead focuses on the second prong of the qualified-immunity inquiry, arguing he is entitled to qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established at the relevant time.

Florentina Demuth v. County of Los Angeles

798 F.3d 837 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 14, 2015

We review the district court’s factual findings for clear error and its grant of qualified immunity de novo. … This doctrine protects government officials from suits for damages unless their actions violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

Morgan-Tyra v. City of St. Louis

District Court, E.D. Missouri · Sep 22, 2022

An officer is entitled to qualified immunity unless the evidence establishes (1) a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the violation such that a reasonable … State Univ., 495 F.3d 591, 594 (8th Cir. 2007) (“Although the defendant bears the burden of proof for [qualified immunity], the plaintiff must demonstrate that the law was clearly established.”); Johnson-El v.

Lazarus

District Court, W.D. Virginia · Mar 4, 2026

Qualified Immunity. … See id. at 368 (“[A]s Defendants have not presented any penological interest . . . and [the plaintiff’s] right was clearly established, we hold that Defendants have not shown that they are entitled to qualified immunity

Blackman v. Butler

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Dec 9, 2019

Qualified Immunity Defendants object to Judge Sison’s conclusion that they are not entitled to qualified immunity on Blackman’s due process claim with regard to his … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009) (to determine whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, a court must consider whether there is a violation of a constitutional right and whether that right was clearly established

Mcevoy v. Spencer

124 F.3d 92 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 11, 1997

Qualified Immunity 15 The defense of qualified immunity shields government agents "from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … A defendant pleading qualified immunity on a motion to dismiss is entitled to prevail if the allegations in the complaint fail to "state a claim of violation of clearly established law." Behrens v.

Smith v. Siegelman

322 F.3d 1290 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 28, 2003

The qualified immunity defense may be raised and addressed on a motion to dismiss, and will be granted if the complaint "fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right." Chesser v. … B. 12 Qualified immunity protects government officials sued in their individual capacities as long as their conduct does not violate "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

In re the Marriage of Nelson

Court of Appeals of Iowa · Oct 20, 2021

That year, Mick filed a pro se request to end his obligation because the children no longer qualified for support. … App. 2005) (“Clearly when a child support award is based on two qualifying children and one no longer qualifies, there has been a substantial change in circumstances.”); see also Iowa Code § 598.21C(1).

MOUNTAIN v. DOZIER

District Court, M.D. Georgia · Aug 17, 2021

Accordingly, when a defendant raises the defense of qualified immunity in a motion to dismiss, the court must take the plaintiff’s allegations as true and determine whether they assert a violation of a clearly established … Beach, 561 F.3d 1288, 1291 (11th Cir. 2009) (stating that to overcome qualified immunity a plaintiff must establish that “the officer’s conduct amounted to a constitutional violation” and “the right violated was clearly