Case law

King v. Ambs

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 21, 2008

established and Officer Ambs would be entitled to qualified immunity. . . . … Ambs’s conduct vis-a-vis the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis.

Hayden v. Green

640 F.3d 150 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 5, 2011

that right was clearly established in light of the specific context of the case. … We reverse the district court’s order denying qualified immunity, and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Mark Lyon v. S. Thacker

517 F. App'x 564 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 23, 2013

Dismissal of Lyon’s claims for damages was proper because defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. See Pearson v. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009) (defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless the conduct at issue violated a clearly established constitutional right).

Cory Burnett v. Phillip Smith and State of Iowa

Supreme Court of Iowa · May 5, 2023

These include whether qualified immunity is available and what the standard should be, Baldwin I, 915 N.W.2d at 279–81; whether judicial process immunity is available, Venckus v. … Supp. 3d at 953 (“For the same reasons they must be denied federal qualified immunity on Clinton’s § 1983 claim, Officers Garrett, Steinkamp, and Minnehan must also be denied immunity under state law.”); Williams, 516

Schultz v. Braga

290 F. Supp. 2d 637 · District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 13, 2003

Thus, “unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” … In ruling on a defense of qualified immunity, a court must (1) identify “the specific right allegedly violated”; (2) determine “whether at the time of the alleged violation the right was clearly established”; and (3) if so

Waterman v. Batton

393 F.3d 471 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 3, 2005

Thus, government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages to the extent that “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … established’ for qualified immunity purposes” and that “ ‘[c]learly established’ in this context includes not only already specifically adjudicated rights, but those manifestly included within more general applications of

Deborah Franklin v. City of Charlotte

64 F.4th 519 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 4, 2023

In which case, Officer Kerl violated clearly established law. … Therefore, she is not entitled to qualified immunity on Mrs.

Davis v. Bradshaw

District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 25, 2020

Pridmore, 961 F.3d 1135, 1145-46 (11th Cir. 2020) (stating that identification of a broad, clearly established principle is one way to show that a defendant’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right … Davis has not carried his burden to show that Deputy Jones is not entitled to qualified immunity. See Keating v.

Department of Environmental Protection v. Franklin Tp.

3 N.J. Tax 105 · New Jersey Tax Court · Aug 4, 1981

, it would have clearly so stated. … Washington Tp., both supra, establish that property acquired by a state agency otherwise entitled to an exemption from taxation is not immune from the imposition of rollback taxes once a change in use has occurred.

Ramirez v. Killian

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 30, 2022

The qualified-immunity analysis requires that a right be “clearly established.” See id. … violated clearly established law.”

Emil A. Tonkovich v. Kansas Board Of Regents

159 F.3d 504 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 26, 1998

I, doc. 3 at 172 (plaintiff's failure to allege that Hearing Committee members violated clearly established right entitles them to qualified immunity); id., doc. 4 at 216-17 (plaintiff's failure to identify clearly established … Pages and pages of facts are no substitute for citations to clearly established law. Nor can they meet Professor Tonkovich's burden on qualified immunity.

Estate of Marvin L. Booker v. Gomez

745 F.3d 405 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 11, 2014

Qualified Immunity—clearly established law Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because their actions did -40- not violate clearly established law. … Booker’s serious medical need and (b) this would violate clearly established law, we affirm the district court’s denial of qualified immunity. a.

Dodge v. Dean

31 F. App'x 759 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 29, 2002

Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99 , 112 n. 4 (2d Cir. 2000) (“[W]e see no reason to expect that discovery would have helped [plaintiff] establish a triable issue of material fact. … And we are particularly reluctant to remand for unnecessary discovery because this case revolves around questions of absolute and qualified immunity.”). The judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.

Hails v. Dennis

District Court, S.D. Alabama · Feb 14, 2018

Forsyth the Supreme Court reiterated that “[u]nless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the … of a clearly established constitutional right.’ “).

Slone v. Herman

983 F.2d 107 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 4, 1993

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), the Supreme Court held that, in order for officials to lose their qualified immunity, their conduct must violate “clearly established statutory … The Court stated that the agent was entitled to qualified immunity if, “in light of the clearly established principles governing warrantless searches, he could, as a matter of law, reasonably have believed that the search

Quinton Brown v. Larry Adams

667 F. App'x 265 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 23, 2016

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Brown’s First Amendment claim on the basis of qualified immunity because it would not have been clear to every reasonable official that denying Brown’s religious texts … See Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731, 735, 741 (2011) (discussing qualified immunity and noting that a right is clearly established only if “every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates

West v. Kind

District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Jun 12, 2024

Most of the time, the reason for dismissal of a complaint on qualified immunity grounds is the lack of a clearly established constitutional right. … “Ultimately, dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) is appropriate based on qualified immunity only when the plaintiffs’ well-pleaded allegations, taken as true, do not ‘state a claim of violation of clearly established law.’”

(PC) Abdullah v. Dacuycuy

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 28, 2023

Qualified Immunity 5 Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because the actions they took 6 were not clearly unconstitutional. (ECF No. 52-1 at 21.) … (Id.) 9 Qualified immunity applies when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established 10 statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.

Gaston v. Ploeger

229 F. App'x 702 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 12, 2007

When a defendant has asserted qualified immunity, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish: (1) that the defendant violated the plaintiffs constitutional right, and (2) that, at the time of the incident, it was clearly … The appellants contend that, as a matter of law, the facts in the record do not establish a constitutional violation; if this is true, they are necessarily entitled to qualified immunity.

Michael A. Kroll v. United States Capitol Police

847 F.2d 899 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 21, 1988

Kroll did not constitute the violation of a “clearly established” right within the meaning of Harlow . … Under Harlow and its progeny, defendants’ entitlement to qualified immunity raises only a narrow question.