Case law

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.

United States v. Ledford (Geneva Saylor)

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

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.

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”)

Nunes v. Stephens

District Court, E.D. California · May 17, 2021

Defendants appealed the denial of qualified immunity. 1 On December 29, 2020, the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion that reversed this Court’s 2 denial of qualified immunity. See Nunes v. … Raemisch, 864 F.3d 1071, 1078-79 (10th Cir. 2017) (holding that a prior published opinion could be read narrowly or 28 expansively and was too ambiguous to constitute “clearly established law” for purposes of qualified

Sims v. Figueroa

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 27, 2019

Qualified Immunity Defendant Figueroa alternatively asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … As to qualified immunity, the Eleventh Circuit has stated: To invoke qualified immunity, a public official must first demonstrate

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.”

Michael Bourne v. Michael Gunnels

921 F.3d 484 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 16, 2019

Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), and its progeny, or, alter- natively, (3) defendants are entitled to qualified immunity (“QI”) from his claims because he did not establish a constitutional violation. … “A qualified immunity defense alters the usual summary judgment bur- den of proof.” Brown v. Callahan, 623 F.3d 249, 253 (5th Cir. 2010).

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.

Vreeland v. Olson

District Court, D. Colorado · Sep 16, 2021

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Accordingly, plaintiff has not carried his burden, in the face of the assertion of qualified immunity, to show that this right was clearly established in 5 Plaintiff argues for the first time in his response to the objection

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.

Gordon v. Katz

934 F. Supp. 79 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 17, 1996

It has also been clearly established that in order for legislative immunity to attach, the acts complained of must not only be substantively legislative but also procedurally legislative. Ryan v. … Plaintiffs argue that in order for legislative immunity to apply, accepted and established legislative procedures must be followed.

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

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

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

Derrick Sanderlin v. Jason Dwyer

116 F.4th 905 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 4, 2024

immunity because he did not violate clearly established law. … We now turn to the second prong of qualified immunity—whether the right violated was “clearly established.” We ask whether the law was “clearly established at the time an action occurred.”

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

Longval v. O'Toole

19 Mass. L. Rptr. 308 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jan 28, 2005

Second, they assert that the complaint fails to allege facts constituting a violation of the plaintiffs “clearly established” rights, and that they therefore are entitled to qualified immunity. A. … Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 232 (1991) (right must be clearly established “at the time the defendant acted” to overcome defense of qualified immunity). The standard is purely an objective one. In Harlow v.

Joann Cooper v. Ryan Black

503 F. App'x 672 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 12, 2012

When a defendant raises the defense of qualified immunity in a motion to dismiss, this court “review[s] the denial of [the] motion . . . de novo and determine[s] whether the complaint alleges a clearly established constitutional … For the same reasons Officer Black is entitled to qualified immunity for Appellees’ Fourth Amendment claims, he is also entitled to qualified immunity for the Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process claims.

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).