Case law

David Lee v. City of Portsmouth

2002 DNH 064 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Mar 19, 2002

"Clearly established for the purposes of qualified immunity means that the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right." … The next step is to ask whether the right to be free from excessive force under the facts alleged was clearly established.

Millet v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 13, 2025

Wesby, 583 U.S. 48, 62–63 (2018) (“[O]fficers are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established … As noted, “officers are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’”

Bernard Jones v. Rick McNeese

746 F.3d 887 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 26, 2014

was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct. … was 'clearly established.'"

Pierson v. Itawamba County, Mississippi

District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Jun 3, 2020

Thomas, 843 F.3d 172, 177 (Sth Cir. 2016) (“Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right.”) (quoting Mace v. … Qualified immunity calls for a bifurcated test in which the court must first determine (1) “whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established

Jane ANDRE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the BENDIX CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee

841 F.2d 172 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 2, 1988

To meet her burden of establishing a prima facie case of discriminatory discharge, Andre must therefore show both that she was qualified for and satisfactorily performing the duties of her job. Lee v. … The district court held that Andre met her initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of discriminatory treatment because she proved that she was a member of a protected class, she was qualified for her position and

Allstate Insurance v. Elwell

513 A.2d 269 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jul 23, 1986

A contract is against public policy if it “clearly appears to be in violation of some well established rule of law, or that its tendency will be harmful to the interests of society.” Lesieur v. … MacDonald, 412 A.2d 71 (Me.1980), and parent-child immunity, Black v.

Walker v. City of Orem

451 F.3d 1139 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 27, 2006

Plaintiffs version of the facts therefore shows the violation of a clearly-established constitutional right. We must therefore affirm the district court’s order denying qualified immunity to Officer Peterson. … That right is also clearly established. We must therefore affirm the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to Officer Clayton.

McKnight v. Kingsboro

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 6, 2024

At this stage of the litigation, these averments are sufficient to establish that Defendants Ferrari and Heine violated clearly established law for the purposes of qualified immunity. See Dayoub v. … Additionally, the “clearly established” test relates only to a qualified immunity, not a sovereign immunity, analysis. Brautigam, 684 F.

Dwain Smith v. Conway County, Arkansas

759 F.3d 853 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 16, 2014

“The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.” Id. at ___, 134 S. Ct. at 1866 (quoting Hope v. … The district court denied Zulpo qualified immunity.

Jack E. Turner v. E. T. Raynes and Bill Edd Jones

611 F.2d 92 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 31, 1980

Sheriff Jones’ Qualified Immunity The court below entered summary judgment for Sheriff Jones grounded in his qualified official immunity. This must be upheld. … Searching for clues to the Court’s position, however, we cannot ignore another possible reading of footnote 7: that only a clearly inordinate exercise of unconferred jurisdiction by a judge — one so crass as to establish

Linda K. Wood v. Steven C. Ostrander Neil Maloney

851 F.2d 1212 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 13, 1988

Qualified immunity State officials cannot be held liable for damages under § 1983 unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right. Davis v. … away clearly established law.

Sharon Ann Belcher, as Administratrix of the Estate of Rocky L. Belcher, Deceased v. The City of Foley, Alabama, James Anderson Officer Jimmy Roberson Charles McKinley Dwain Riebeling, Sharon Ann Belcher, as Administratrix of the Estate of Rocky L. Belcher, Deceased v. The City of Foley, Alabama James Anderson Officer Jimmy Roberson Charles McKinley Dwain Riebeling

30 F.3d 1390 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 2, 1994

Thus, to overcome the defendants' qualified immunity, Mrs. … Belcher's death no decision had clearly established that Chief Anderson's actions or inactions constituted deliberate indifference, he is entitled to qualified immunity. 40 2.

Guercio v. Brody

500 U.S. 904 · Supreme Court of the United States · Apr 29, 1991

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.

James Raper, Jr. v. Tina Maxwell

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 10, 2023

Hickey, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that qualified immunity … Roy, 847 F.3d 637, 641– 42 (8th Cir. 2017) (reviewing the failure to state a claim de novo and explaining that a right must be clearly established for an alleged violation to defeat qualified immunity).

Kaminsky v. Rosenblum

929 F.2d 922 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 9, 1991

DISCUSSION I Doctrine of Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity evolved as a balance between the need, on one hand, to hold responsible public officials exercising their power in a wholly unjustified manner … Even when a plaintiffs federal rights are so clearly defined that a reasonable public official would know that his actions might violate those rights, qualified or good faith immunity might still be available as a bar to

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.

Cleveland-Perdue v. Brutsche

881 F.2d 427 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 4, 1989

Under the Harlow standard, qualified immunity should be granted when the official's conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … right allegedly violated must have been clearly established in a particularized sense.

Rudolph STECKL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MOTOROLA, INC., Defendant-Appellee

703 F.2d 392 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 4, 1983

We agree with the district court that Steckl had established a prima facie case of discrimination as required by Texas Department of Community Affairs v. … He was clearly within the protected class, had applied for an available position for which he was qualified, and was denied a promotion which was given to a younger person.

Citizens in Charge, Inc. v. Jon Husted

810 F.3d 437 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 19, 2016

Public officials thus are eligible for qualified immunity if (1) they did not violate any constitutional guarantees or (2) the guarantee, even if violated, was not “clearly established” at the time of the alleged misconduct … Far from being clearly established, the plaintiffs’ rights under the Dormant Commerce Clause have not yet been established at all.