Case law

Grawey v. Drury

567 F.3d 302 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 28, 2009

Qualified Immunity 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 … Clearly Established Constitutional Right The next step of our qualified immunity analysis is whether the alleged violations involved a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct

Meekison v. Voinovich

17 F. Supp. 2d 725 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 21, 1998

Meekison’s Claim Under the ADA To establish a prima facie case under the ADA, Meekison must show: (1) she was disabled within the meaning of the statute at the time of her employment; (2) she was qualified to perform the … Prima Facie Case To establish a prima facie ease under the ADEA, Meekison must show the following: a) membership in the protected class (between the ages of 40 and 70); b) that she applied and was qualified for a promotion

VDARE Foundation v. City of Colorado Springs

11 F.4th 1151 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 23, 2021

was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.” … As a result, we needn’t reach the second prong regarding clearly established law. Hesse v.

Mitchell v. Forsyth

472 U.S. 511 · Supreme Court of the United States · Jun 19, 1985

Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery. See id., at 818 . … qualified immunity.

Blankenship v. Stewart

District Court, D. Nevada · Nov 20, 2020

Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 17 (2009) (“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil 18 damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Therefore, this Court properly found 20 that URP members were entitled to qualified immunity. 21 Finally, Defendants argue that Stewart and Filson are not entitled to qualified immunity 22 and this

Ceramic Corp. of America v. Inka Maritime Corp.

1 F.3d 947 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 6, 1993

Even where the defendant is amenable to process in the alternative forum, however, there may be “rare circumstances” in which the “remedy provided by the alternative forum is so clearly inadequate or unsatisfactory that it … Because Japan will “not permit litigation of the subject matter of the dispute,” we are confronted with one of those rare instances where the remedy 'provided by the alternative forum is *950 “clearly unsatisfactory.”

Vaughn v. Greene County

438 F.3d 845 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 17, 2006

did not specify the disputed facts on which it relied, thereby making it difficult for this court to "know what set of facts to assume when [we] answer[ ] the purely legal question about `clearly established' law." … Individual Liability of Sheriff Langston 12 "Qualified immunity protects a government official from liability in a [section] 1983 claim unless his or her conduct violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional

Howard v. Fisk

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 18, 2020

Thus, the Court must conclude that Fisk is entitled to qualified immunity and dismiss all individual capacity claims against her. See Estate of Walker v. … Wallace, 881 F.3d 1056, 1060 (8th Cir. 2018) (“An individual is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”)

Charles Hamner v. Danny Burls

937 F.3d 1171 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 11, 2019

was “clearly established.” … In evaluating an officer’s claim to qualified immunity, “[t]he dispositive question is whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.” Mullenix v. Luna, 136 S.

Kindrow v. Benson

District Court, E.D. Michigan · Nov 19, 2021

[And] sometimes [qualified immunity] [is] best resolved in a motion to dismiss,” particularly where the complaint itself establishes the defense. Siefert v. … Indeed, “[u]nless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.”

Frank Humphrey v. Norbert Staszak

148 F.3d 719 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 23, 1998

In the context of an arrest, qualified immunity “will shield a police officer from § 1983 liability if a reasonable officer could have believed [the plaintiffs arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and … CONCLUSION For these reasons and those stated by the Supreme Court and by us in our previous decisions, we hold that Officer Staszak did not violate a clearly established law and that he is entitled to qualified immunity,

Almighty Supreme Born Allah v. Milling

876 F.3d 48 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 22, 2017

“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 … Allah argues, and the district court concluded below, that Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity because Wolfish and its progeny clearly established the “right to be free from punishment before guilt” under substantive

Juan Alberto Blanco Garcia v. State of Tennessee

425 S.W.3d 248 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 23, 2013

whether trial counsel performed deficiently, Padilla requires us to answer two questions: (1) whether deportation and the plea’s effect on the petitioner’s future eligibility to return legally to the United States were clearly … Blanco also acknowledged that neither immigration lawyer indicated specifically whether child abuse qualified as a crime involving moral turpitude, but instead recommended that the petitioner consult with trial counsel on

ELLIS v. LAWSON

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 17, 2025

"Qualified immunity is a doctrine that 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 … Defendants frame their qualified immunity argument (as it relates to the conditions claim rather than the medical deliberate indifference claim) as follows: It has not been clearly established that using a squeegee

Handy v. Fisher

District Court, D. Colorado · Jul 1, 2020

Plaintiffs claim that by neglecting to argue that the law was not clearly established defendants failed to meet their burden of pleading and developing their qualified immunity defense. … However, the qualified immunity analysis only considers what law was clearly established “at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.” Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 129 S. Ct. 808, 811, 172 L.

Citizens Committee for Faraday Wood v. John v. Lindsay, Mayor of the City of New York

507 F.2d 1065 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 28, 1975

Williams, 397 U.S. 471 , 90 S.Ct. 1153 , 25 L.Ed.2d 491 (1970), plaintiffs must establish that the city’s action impinges on a suspect class in order to qualify for the stricter compelling state interest standard. … Such relief would clearly be inappropriate. *1070 Also, in Lackawanna the record clearly established that the city’s actions had been motivated by improper racial considerations. Kennedy Park Homes Assn. v.

Pitt, Christopher v. DC

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 26, 2007

Hust, 477 F.3d 1070, 1079 (9th Cir. 2007) (“Whether the right at issue in a claim of qualified immunity is clearly established . . . is a pure question of law . . . .”); Williams v. Ala. … immunity on these claims because this right was not “clearly established” at the time of the actions at issue in this case.

Brown v. Frey

889 F.2d 159 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 7, 1989

Trickey did not violate Brown’s clearly established right to call witnesses at the February 27 contraband hearing. As a result, they are entitled to qualified immunity and are immune from liability. … Trickey are immune from liability under the doctrine of qualified good faith immunity because they did not violate any clearly established constitutional right.

Estate of Clark v. Walker

865 F.3d 544 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 26, 2017

Step 2: Clearly Established Law We do have jurisdiction to review the second qualified immunity step: whether Clark’s asserted rights were clearly established at the time of his suicide. … First, he argues that it is “doubtful” whether circuit precedent can clearly establish law for purposes of qualified immunity. He cites two Supreme Court cases, but both cases leave this question unanswered.

City of Houston v. Catrennia Foreman Sauls, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Dwayne Foreman, And Tristena Christian, as Next Friend of D.F., a Minor

Texas Supreme Court · May 10, 2024

. § 1983 “unequivocally negated the original interpretive premise for qualified immunity”); Zadeh, 928 F.3d at 479-81 (Willett, J., concurring) (criticizing the “clearly established law” standard). … See Chambers, 883 S.W.2d at 657 (although “federal immunity may be conferred at the summary judgment stage by the court’s finding that the constitutional right at issue was not clearly established,” “[n]o analogous threshold