Case law

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

Vasquez v. Davis

226 F. Supp. 3d 1189 · District Court, D. Colorado · Dec 28, 2016

Duty & Qualified Immunity a. … The “clearly established” element of the qualified immunity analysis would not require a specific case about vomiting blood before CDOC officials could be held liable. Cf.

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

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

Porter v. Bowen

496 F.3d 1009 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 6, 2007

Finally, we hold that Jones is entitled to qualified immunity from damages because the constitutionality of halting vote swapping was not clearly established in 2000. … The court ruled that Jones was entitled to qualified immunity because “the law regarding the constitutionality of prohibiting internet vo-teswapping is far from 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.

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.” 

Hameed v. Mann

57 F.3d 217 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 15, 1995

The district court dismissed the complaint against Selsky on the ground that he was entitled to absolute immunity. Thereafter, in Young v. … to qualified immunity.

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

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.

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.

Thompson v. City of Dallas

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 24, 2024

“The reasonableness of the official’s conduct and the degree to which the particular right in question was clearly established are thus merged into one issue for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis.” … And, if evidence did, Thompson has not carried his burden as to qualified immunity’s clearly established prong to the extent that he relies on “Cole v.

Wood v. State of Utah

District Court, D. Utah · Jan 3, 2025

qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields state officers from civil liability if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Wooten v. Campbell

49 F.3d 696 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 6, 1995

Under the qualified immunity standards, Wooten fails to demonstrate that the defendants violated a clearly established right. It was not  I. … Under the qualified immunity defense, the defendants are immune from liability if Wooten's complaint fails to state a violation of a "clearly established statutory or constitutional right[ ] of which a reasonable person

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.

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.”

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.

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.

Nicholas Roberson v. James Torres

770 F.3d 398 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 21, 2014

We have jurisdiction over this question on interlocutory review because it asks whether the facts, as alleged, indicate a violation of clearly established law, such that the denial of qualified immunity was appropriate. … , and (2) whether that right was clearly established.”