Case law

Weatherford Ex Rel. Michael L. v. State

206 Ariz. 529 · Arizona Supreme Court · Dec 17, 2003

Government officials performing discretionary functions, however, receive qualified immunity from § 1983 actions unless their conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or federal statutory *532 right of which … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). ¶ 6 To overcome the social workers’ qualified immunity defense, Weatherford bears the initial burden of proving a violation of a clearly established

Billups v. Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center

910 F. Supp. 2d 745 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 20, 2012

Immunity Finally, the Court will address whether Drs. … Choudhary, Crowell, and Dias are absolutely immune from liability. B.

Hernandez v. City of Rochester

260 F. Supp. 2d 599 · District Court, W.D. New York · Apr 30, 2003

clearly established law.” … Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 200, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001). 9 *613 To establish a qualified immunity defense, then, defendants must show either “(a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or

33 Seminary LLC v. City of Binghamton

120 F. Supp. 3d 223 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 28, 2015

Absolute and Qualified Immunity Defendants also argue that even if they violated Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights, they are entitled to qualified immunity in their individual capacities because they did not violate a clearly … Defendants unreasonably violated a clearly established right of Plaintiffs.

Misael Cordero v. Gregory Kelley

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 19, 2026

The analysis of a qualified immunity claim is guided by a two-part test: (1) “whether the facts … show the violation of a legal right,” and (2) “whether that right was clearly established.” Id. at 227. … And a “state statute cannot ‘clearly establish’ the federal right for qualified immunity purposes.” Id.

Robinson v. Prunty

249 F.3d 862 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 7, 2001

The defendants moved for summary judgment on the ground that they were entitled to qualified immunity. … “In order to determine whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, a court must (1) identify the right allegedly violated, (2) determine whether the right was ‘clearly established,’ and (3) determine whether a

United States v. Morton

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 23, 2022

Morton, 984 F.3d 421, 427 (5th Cir. 2021), they do not establish probable cause “that the photographs on Morton’s phones would contain evidence pertinent to [that] crime,” id. at 428. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 236 (2009) (giving courts discretion to rule only on the “clearly established” inquiry for qualified immunity but recognizing that deciding the underlying constitutional question is “often

Springer v. Placer County

338 F. App'x 587 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 18, 2009

We follow a two-pronged approach when analyzing qualified immunity. … Morris confronted that her conduct was unlawful under clearly established law.

Sanchez v. County of Sacramento

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 25, 2023

The Court agrees with Defendants that there is no clearly established law and thus 4 Allbee is entitled to qualified immunity. … However, the “clearly established” standard applies to federal 5 qualified immunity; under California’s Bane Act, the “clearly delineated” standard 6 governs, which is different.

Muschette v. Gionfriddo

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 7, 2018

“Qualified immunity protects officials from liability for civil damages as  long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or  constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”   … Torreso, 764 F.3d  217, 237 (2d Cir. 2014) (“An officer is not entitled to qualified immunity on the grounds  that the law is not clearly established every time a novel method is used to inflict  injury.” 

Ragland v. City of New York

District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 25, 2022

In addition, with respect to the defense of qualified immunity under federal law, or governmental immunity under New York Law, a jury could conclude that the Defendants’ decision to search and arrest Plaintiff under such … City of New York, 478 F.3d 76, 87 (2d Cir. 2007) (“Under federal law, a police officer is entitled to qualified immunity where (1) his conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of

Moses Stryker v. City of Homewood

978 F.3d 769 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 20, 2020

Qualified immunity is a doctrine that shields public officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … violated was clearly established.”

Park v. Shiflett

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 17, 2001

The determination of whether qualified immunity exists is ultimately a question for the court. The standard used for determining qualified immunity is an "objectively reasonable" standard. … The court does not look to the sub- jective intent of the officer in granting qualified immunity.

People of Michigan v. Dametrius Benjamin Posey

Michigan Supreme Court · Jul 31, 2023

immunity rather than complete immunity applies where the prosecutor is acting as a police officer and not in the role of an advocate) (quotation marks and citation omitted). … The lead opinion does not address this important qualifier.

Sanchez v. Guzman

105 F.4th 1285 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 28, 2024

established law prong of the qualified-immunity test. … entitled to qualified immunity.

Dale D. Hoover v. Patricia Radabaugh

307 F.3d 460 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 3, 2002

Clearly Established Constitutional Rights As noted above, the Sixth Circuit uses a two-part test to determine whether an official is protected by qualified immunity. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982): clearly established rights, for the purpose of qualified immunity, are “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Kenneth Miller v. Michael Wenerowicz

648 F. App'x 161 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 2, 2016

Id. at 89.2 Even if a prison official’s restriction on the right to marry is unconstitutional under the Turner test, however, the official is immune from suit unless the right at issue was “clearly established.” … Even if a “robust consensus” of persuasive authority could clearly establish a right, Taylor v. Barkes, 135 S.

Medina, Hector Rolando

475 S.W.3d 291 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 4, 2015

Is the State, in a post-conviction evidentiary hearing on a writ of habeas corpus, clearly prohibited from calling the writ applicant to testify— under a grant of both use and derivative-use immunity — about whether he was … We have recently recognized that “an issue of first impression can sometimes qualify for mandamus relief when the factual scenario has never been precisely addressed but the principle of law has been clearly established.”

Robinson v. White

District Court, E.D. Michigan · Oct 25, 2024

Defendant’s second argument on qualified immunity roughly equates to: even if there was a constitutional violation here, the individual officers are entitled to qualified immunity for reasonable but … not be entitled to qualified immunity.

William Willson v. Thomas Yerke

604 F. App'x 149 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 11, 2015

immunity from § 1983 claims for damages unless the facts alleged by the plaintiff show the violation of a constitutional right, and the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct. 5 Here … qualified immunity on this basis as well.