Case law

Matthew Milstead, Administrator of the Estate of Mark Milstead v. Chad Kibler Scott Proctor Lester Whetzel

243 F.3d 157 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 5, 2001

The legal principles governing qualified immunity analysis are well established. … “Police officers are protected by qualified immunity when performing their duties within the scope of their employment insofar as their conduct does not breach ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

Farris v. Maury County Jail

District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Apr 4, 2025

Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages “unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time. … Evans, 90 F.4th 541, 548 (6th Cir. 2024) (the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiff’s cursory briefing makes no attempt to meet his burden of showing that the defendant violated his clearly

Fajardo v. City of Bakersfield

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 25, 2022

Immunity 3 “Qualified immunity shields officers from civil liability so long as their conduct does not 4 violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … S. 223 (2009)(holding 6 that officers were entitled to qualified immunity because their entry did not violate clearly 7

Patrick v. Miller

953 F.2d 1240 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 27, 1992

, public officials lose immunity in the face of clearly established law. … established law," thereby giving rise to qualified immunity under Harlow....

Estella Lucero v. Dennis B. Hart, Rugh J. Papp, and Susie Mitchell

915 F.2d 1367 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 3, 1990

Government officials are immune from liability for civil damages under § 1983 unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Under Harlow’s “reasonable person” test, no clearly established statutory or constitutional right was violated. Thus, the district court’s grant of summary judgment on the issue of qualified immunity is affirmed. B.

Soto v. Trejo

District Court, D. New Mexico · May 29, 2024

In their Motion, Defendants argue that Defendant Johnson is entitled to qualified immunity because Plaintiff has not alleged that she violated any clearly established law or acted with requisite intent to state a § 1983 … Defendants point out that, under Plaintiff’s view of what constitutes a violation of “clearly established” law, any violation of an administrative rule would suffice to deny qualified immunity to a state official.

Dufort v. City of New York

874 F.3d 338 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 27, 2017

Qualified Immunity In the alternative, the Defendants argue that even if Dufort has established the requisite elements of his false arrest and malicious prosecution claims, they are nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity … Qualified immunity establishes a defense for a government actor acting in his official capacity. Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335, 341 , 106 S.Ct. 1092 , 89 L.Ed.2d 271 (1986).

Yerdon v. Poitras

120 F.4th 1150 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 5, 2024

And it is well-established that Congress has not validly abrogated the states’ sovereign immunity for claims arising under Title I. See Bd. of Trs. of Univ. of Ala. v. Garrett, 531 U.S. 356, 360 (2001). … Because Congress has clearly expressed its intention to abrogate state sovereign immunity for all claims under the ADA, see 42 U.S.C.

Kim D. Lee v. Luis Ferraro

284 F.3d 1188 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 5, 2002

Qualified immunity offers “complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities as long as ‘their conduct violates no clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Talladega City Bd. of Educ., 115 F.3d 821, 826 n.4 (11th Cir. 1997) (“In this circuit, the law can be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S.

Brown v. Callahan

623 F.3d 249 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 7, 2010

The qualified immunity defense has two prongs: whether an official’s conduct violated a constitutional right of the plaintiff; and whether the right was clearly established at the time of the violation. Manis v. … To be clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity, the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right. Brown v.

BUSH v. RENEGAR

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 9, 2020

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity has long “protect[ed] government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … establish a right for purposes of qualified immunity.”

Javier Vanegas v. City of Pasadena

46 F.4th 1159 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 31, 2022

CITY OF PASADENA qualified immunity analysis—whether the unlawfulness of the officers’ conduct was not “clearly established.” … And even if no probable cause existed under state law, they contend they are still entitled to qualified immunity given there was no violation of clearly established law.

Patricia Polanco v. Ralph Diaz

76 F.4th 918 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 7, 2023

NELSON, dissenting: Because the law is not clearly established, I conclude that the Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … Id. at 1121 (granting qualified immunity because it found the law was not clearly established).

Donovan v. City of Milwaukee

17 F.3d 944 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 18, 1994

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “governmental officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … As the Adams court correctly ob *953 served, “generalities are just not helpful” in qualified immunity decisions because “[t]he bright line of ‘clearly established law”’ is “staked out by a process of inclusion and exclusion

Neri v. City of San Benito, Texas

District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 22, 2024

In his Motion to Dismiss, Stansbury pleads qualified immunity. Dkt. No. 17, pp. 3- 4. Resultingly, it is Neri who bears the burden of establishing that qualified immunity is inappropriate. … Given the above, Stansbury is entitled to the protections of qualified immunity because there is no clearly established law that put him on notice that his conduct was unconstitutional.

Abdulsalaam v. Franklin County Board of Commissioners

637 F. Supp. 2d 561 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 23, 2009

qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity Defendants claim that they are entitled to qualified immunity on all of Plaintiffs’ federal claims.

Technical Ordnance, Inc. v. United States

244 F.3d 641 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 26, 2001

Moreover, since Moore's conduct took place prior to the 1994 decision in Albright, it could not have violated any clearly established constitutional right. Moore is entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. … established constitutional right and that as a matter of law he is entitled to qualified immunity.

McClellan v. Smith

439 F.3d 137 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Feb 24, 2006

In rejecting the claim that it misapplied the facts to the issue of qualified immunity, the District Court considered the following facts established: [McClellan] admitted that [Smith] identified himself as a police officer … Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity offers protection for “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Cindy L. Cameron and Lawrence M. Cameron v. James McCauley Seitz, Monroe County Probate Court

38 F.3d 264 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 21, 1994

Seitz is entitled to qualified immunity in the performance of official discretionary functions to the extent that his conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. Flatford v. … The fact that the contours of such protection simply have not been clearly extended to engagements compels the con *276 elusion that qualified immunity is mandated here. 5 Because there were no clearly established constitutional

Parker v. St. Stephen's Urban Dev.

243 N.J. Super. 317 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 24, 1990

That total figure is *321 prorated among the apartments to establish the "basic rent" for each unit. … Defendant clearly falls outside the scope of this definition. No benefactor whose charitable contributions require protection exists in this case.