Case law

Lelah Jerger v. Shannon Blaize

41 F.4th 910 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 26, 2022

If the facts, as represented by the Jergers, portray a clearly established constitutional viola- tion, the district court’s decision cannot stand. See Taylor v. … Of course, “specificity is im- portant” in defining clearly established law, but there need not be “a case presenting the exact same facts” for defendants to be on notice that their behavior violates constitutional rights.

Rosenberg v. Vangelo

93 F. App'x 373 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 12, 2004

does not reflect clearly established law. … “[I]t is not sufficient that the right at issue be clearly established as a general matter.

Hernandez-Lopez v. Pereira

380 F. Supp. 2d 30 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Mar 22, 2005

Dep’t For Children, Youth & Their Families, 321 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir.2003) (qualified immunity applies if the asserted constitutional right was not “clearly established” at the time of the alleged violation). … The Court of Appeals has established a three-part test when determining if a public official is entitled to qualified immunity: (1) whether plaintiffs’ allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation; (2) whether

Tawa Ayeni v. James Mottola

35 F.3d 680 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 12, 1994

Fourth Amendment Claims Bearing in mind the standards for dismissing a claim on qualified immunity grounds, we first examine whether clearly established Fourth Amendment law at the time of the search prohibited Mottola’s … He therefore argues that there was no clearly established rule prohibiting such an act. The argument lacks merit.

Philip Berryman v. Dean Rieger, C. Kukla, Diane Holzheuer

150 F.3d 561 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 6, 1998

immunity — typically, the issue whether the federal right allegedly infringed was clearly established.” … of clearly established law.

Griffin v. New York

122 F. App'x 533 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 17, 2004

Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary duties from “liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … Griffin’s right to be free from these alleged adverse employment actions based on race was therefore clearly established, and the district court properly refused to grant qualified immunity at this time on defendants-appellants

Becky Chasensky v. Scott Walker

740 F.3d 1088 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 22, 2014

Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Defendants are, therefore, entitled to qualified immunity because they have violated no clearly established privacy right. iii.

Veilleux v. Perschau

District Court, D. New Hampshire · Nov 15, 1995

Qualified Immunity Standard In Harlow v . … Bissell, 31 F.3d at 1255-56 (officer entitled to qualified immunity because law recognizing Fifth Amendment violation even if statements are not used was not "clearly established"); Wiley v .

Mammaro v. New Jersey Division of Child Protection & Permanency

814 F.3d 164 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 19, 2016

Even if none exists, it may be possible that a “robust consensus of cases of persuasive authority” in the Court of Appeals could clearly establish a right for purposes of qualified immunity. Taylor v. … This is why caseworkers are protected by qualified immunity unless clearly established law puts them on notice that their conduct is a violation of the Constitution.

Cummings v. Dean

913 F.3d 1227 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 24, 2019

clearly-established federal law. … We agree with Director Dean that he did not violate clearly-established federal law and thus conclude that he is entitled to the defense of qualified immunity.

City of Paintsville v. Paula M. Haney, as Personal Representative of Estate of Donald Prater, Jr.

Kentucky Supreme Court · Aug 14, 2025

The Court of Appeals concluded that the Fire Department was entitled to government immunity and Chief Ratliff was clearly entitled to qualified immunity as he was acting in his role overseeing emergency medical services … does not establish that the [officers] violated [the suspect’s] clearly established rights.

Rogers v. Hall

46 F.4th 308 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 19, 2022

Thus, the district court held that Rogers failed to establish that the defendants’ conduct violated clearly established law, and therefore failed to rebut the defendants’ qualified immunity defense to his claim. … violate clearly established law.”

Goines v. James

189 W. Va. 634 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 22, 1993

Therefore, in order to resolve this issue of qualified immunity, we must also examine the constitutional law pertaining to the Fourth Amendment to determine if the law was clearly established as to whether a warrantless arrest … If, however, the law was clearly established, the immunity defense should fail unless “the ...

Coen v. Runner

854 F.2d 374 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 16, 1988

On those claims the court granted judgment for Runner and Lassiter on qualified immunity grounds. … Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that protects government officials from personal liability unless their actions violate clearly established law of which a reasonable person would have known. Harlow v.

Millspaugh v. Wabash County Department of Public Welfare

746 F. Supp. 832 · District Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 31, 1990

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, public officials performing discretionary functions are protected against suits for damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

W. Va. Board of Education v. Zelda Croaff

West Virginia Supreme Court · May 17, 2017

We find that the circuit court clearly erred in concluding that qualified immunity is unavailable to state agencies. … Va. at 667, 783 S.E.2d at 88 (failure to identify violations of clearly established statutory or constitutional right in an action for defamation, false light, and breach of contract such that qualified immunity barred the

Wilkins v. Moore

40 F.3d 954 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 25, 1994

Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 639-40 [ 107 S.Ct. 3034, 3038-39 , 97 L.Ed.2d 523 ] (1987) (official not entitled to qualified immunity if he violated "clearly established" right).

Pompeo v. Board of Regents of University of New Mexico

852 F.3d 973 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 28, 2017

A To determine whether defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, a court must determine: (1) whether defendants’ conduct violated plaintiffs constitutional rights; and (2) whether the right at issue was clearly established … Ill In assessing defendants’ claims of qualified immunity, we are mindful of the Supreme Court’s admonition to “define the clearly established right at issue on the basis of the specific context of the case.”

Shari Guertin v. State of Mich.

912 F.3d 907 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 4, 2019

unclear it may be that the particular action is a violation) violates a clearly established right." … "Any other result would allow Hope 's fear of 'rigid, overreliance on factual similarity' in analyzing the 'clearly established' prong of the qualified immunity standard to be realized." *935 Baynes , 799 F.3d at 614 (quoting

Michael Easley v. City of Riverside

890 F.3d 851 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 18, 2018

However, an officer using deadly force is entitled to qualified immunity, unless the law was clearly established that the use of force violated the Fourth Amendment. … CITY OF RIVERSIDE in the case law concerning how distinguishable a case may be on its facts before it cannot be construed as clearly established law for qualified-immunity purposes.