Case law

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

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

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.

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.

BALLARD v. DAVIS

District Court, M.D. Georgia · Sep 19, 2025

Vickers, 929 F.3d 1304, 1316 (11th Cir. 2019) (“[T]he qualified immunity analysis requires a clearly established right to be defined with specificity.”). … Ballard’s lawyers have made no effort to carry Ballard’s burden of showing clearly established law, and the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

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

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

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

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.").

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.

Alcala v. Ortega

District Court, D. New Mexico · Jan 5, 2024

A court has the discretion to decide “which of the two prongs of the qualified immunity analysis should be addressed first”—as either issue is dispositive on the issue of qualified immunity. Pearson v. … The Court granted summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity because it found there was no constitutional violation and the Plaintiff failed to show a violation of clearly established law (Doc. 66 at 17–18).

SEPTA v. City of Phila., Aplts.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 24, 2014

The court concluded: “Clearly then, as an agency and instrumentality of the Commonwealth, SEPTA qualifies as an ‘employer’ for purposes of the [Human Relations] Act, subject to the jurisdiction of the [Pennsylvania Human … The fact that the Commonwealth Court did not employ the magic words -- sovereign immunity -- is of no consequence, as the court clearly recognized SEPTA’s enabling statute and its existence as a Commonwealth Agency subject

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.