Case law

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.

Surat v. Klamser

52 F.4th 1261 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 9, 2022

The district court then concluded Officer Klamser was not entitled to qualified immunity because clearly established law would have put a reasonable officer on notice “that an officer may not use a takedown maneuver on … Surat’s constitutional right to be free from excessive force, it erred in denying him qualified immunity because that right was not clearly established at the time of the incident.

Black v. Borough of Atlantic Highlands

263 N.J. Super. 445 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 6, 1993

Even if the Borough had not created the Shade Tree Commission, but had dealt directly with Aymonier, retention of a private contractor and reliance upon his services would clearly be a policy decision. … To ordinary landowners unprotected by statutory immunities, liability in tort to adjoining property owners may be established for damages proximately flowing from dangerous conditions caused by overhanging branches or matter

Knapp v. Goudschaal

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 11, 2025

employees are not entitled to qualified immunity on judicial 5 deception claims.” … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 236 (2009) (holding that courts 21 have discretion to consider the two prongs of qualified immunity, whether a constitutional right 22 was violated and whether that right was clearly established

Russell v. Coughlin

910 F.2d 75 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 2, 1990

On the eve of trial, defendants moved for summary judgment arguing that because Russell had no clearly established liberty interest in remaining out of keeplock they were protected by qualified immunity. … Even when such rights are clearly established, qualified immunity also protects a government official “if it was objectively reasonable for [the official] to believe that his acts did not violate those rights.”

Swain v. Roe

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jun 26, 1997

Qualified Immunity _____________________ Defendants assert that they are, in any event, entitled to qualified immunity from suit. There are two prongs to the qualified immunity analysis. … . _________ . . in 1977, [there was] a 'clearly established' Fourth Amendment right to be free of unreasonable searches.").

Farid v. Goord

200 F. Supp. 2d 220 · District Court, W.D. New York · Feb 9, 2002

Qualified immunity does not bar declaratory and injunctive relief. Allen v. Coughlin, 64 F.3d 77, 81 (2d Cir.1995). … Even if qualified immunity were established in this case, it would not provide grounds for dismissal of all of Farid’s claims. Id. at 81 . It is a defense which defendants must plead and prove. Duamutef v. J.M.

Larry D. Lomaz Pacific Financial Services of America, Inc. v. William A. Hennosy

151 F.3d 493 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 29, 1998

secured by the Constitution,” 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , is limited by two recognized exceptions: qualified immunity and absolute immunity. … The former, the most common type of official immunity, subjects officials to liability for the performance of discretionary functions only when their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Harris v. Clay County, MS

47 F.4th 271 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 24, 2022

It granted Huffman qualified immunity, concluding that Harris did not prove that the sheriff’s actions violated clearly established law. … The second is whether that right is “clearly established.” Id.

Jarett

District Court, D. Kansas · Feb 20, 2026

A defendant may assert qualified immunity and the plaintiff then bears the burden of showing (1) that the defendant’s actions violated a constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of … He has the burden on qualified immunity, and he has not met it.

Stanton v. Sims

571 U.S. 3 · Supreme Court of the United States · Nov 4, 2013

immunity because no clearly established law put him on notice that his conduct was unconstitutional. … qualified immunity precisely because the law regarding warrantless entry in hot pursuit of a fleeing misdemean- ant is not clearly established.

John M. Gately and Patty Sue Gately v. Hamilton

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 22, 2015

The father and his current wife, as co-plaintiffs, argue that the trial court erred by instructing the jury that defendants' conduct is subject to protection under qualified statutory immunities … immunity.

Jackson v. City of Pittsburgh

688 F. Supp. 2d 379 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 22, 2010

Toledo, 446 U.S. 635 , 100 S.Ct. 1920 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980)). “ ‘The qualified immunity defense shields government agents from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … his or her actions violated clearly established law.”

Hartline v. Gallo

546 F.3d 95 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 8, 2008

She further contends that because the strip search violated clearly established law, the individual officers are not entitled to qualified immunity, and that because the search was conducted pursuant to municipal policy, … preclude the defense of qualified immunity ..., we cannot say on the somewhat unique facts before us that it is clearly established that no ‘reasonable suspicion’ justified a strip-search in this case.”

Armando Villanueva v. State of California

986 F.3d 1158 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 28, 2021

CLEVELAND of federal law that was clearly established at the time,” Pauluk v. Savage, 836 F.3d 1117, 1121 (9th Cir. 2016). “We review the district court’s conclusions regarding qualified immunity de novo.” … However, because it believed there was such division, it simply reasoned that the law was not clearly established and ruled for the officers on the basis of qualified immunity. Id. at 1213.

Savard v. Rhode Island

338 F.3d 23 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Aug 4, 2003

The defendants in this case were granted qualified immunity because, according to the district court, the law did not "clearly establish" that reasonable suspicion was needed to strip search people arrested for non-violent … We believe the right of such a person to be free of such a search was 'clearly established' on October 21, 1986."); Weber, 804 F.2d at 803 (denying qualified immunity for defendants who performed suspicionless strip searches

Jamie Kirkpatrick v. County of Washoe

843 F.3d 784 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 9, 2016

“Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.” Sheehan, 135 S.Ct. at 1776 . … , established, and they, .are therefore entitled to qualified immunity..on this claim.

Phillip D. Carlson and Thomas R. Smith v. Mary E. Gorecki

374 F.3d 461 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 23, 2004

Finally, based on this record, Górecki is not entitled to qualified immunity. … The cloak of qualified immunity is removed from a government official if the plaintiffs show that the law prohibiting the government official’s conduct was “clearly established.” Gregorich v.

Estate of Usaamah Abdullah Rahim v. Doe 2

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Oct 20, 2022

We hold that the officers are entitled to qualified immunity under each aspect of the "clearly established" prong of the defense. … The Supreme Court has repeatedly found that officers acting under such circumstances do not violate clearly established law. Two of the Court's recent grants of qualified immunity are illustrative.

Brook Bernini v. City of St. Paul

665 F.3d 997 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 13, 2012

Qualified immunity shields a public official from suit for civil damages when his “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … The officers are therefore entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, establishes a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) the right was