Case law

Robbins v. IOWA-ILLINOIS GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY

160 N.W.2d 847 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Sep 5, 1968

In determining the extent of the qualified immunity granted in the first clause of rule 141(a) the key words are “injustice or undue hardship.” Sanders v. Ayrhart, 89 Idaho 302 , 404 P.2d 589, 594 . … We are unable to determine from the interrogatory as framed whether plaintiffs seek to secure matters given absolute protection under category (2), matters given qualified immunity under category (1) or both.

Patricia Finnegan v. Richard Fountain

915 F.2d 817 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 1, 1990

By comparison, to establish the qualified immunity defense, a police officer must satisfy one of two tests: either that his conduct did not violate “clearly established rights” of which a reasonable person would have known … We read Finnegan’s argument to state that any use of constitutionally excessive force violates “clearly established” rights, so that the qualified immunity may not shield one who has used excessive force.

Timpa v. The City of Dallas

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 6, 2020

Adherence to the Fifth Circuit’s qualified immunity analysis in Pratt, as well as the Supreme Court’s frequent exhortation “not to define clearly established law at a high level of generality,” means that Gutierrez does … Because there is no clearly established law holding unconstitutional restraints analogous to the Defendants’ restraint of Timpa, the Court holds that qualified immunity bars the excessive force claims against the Defendants

Reyes-Herrera v. Flaitz

District Court, W.D. New York · Feb 20, 2020

“An official is therefore entitled to immunity if his action was ‘objectively legally reasonable in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.’” … Defendants advance two arguments in support of their position that they are entitled to qualified immunity: (1) they did not violate a clearly established right, and (2) they had arguable probable

(PC) Bowell v. California Department of Corrections

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 30, 2020

Legal Standards 3 Qualified immunity applies when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established 4 statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … City of Roseville, 882 F.3d 843, 856-57 16 (9th Cir. 2018) (noting that Ninth Circuit precedent is sufficient to meet the “clearly established” 17 prong of qualified immunity); Hamby v.

Romero v. Storey

672 F.3d 880 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 23, 2012

Qualified immunity shields government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … In other words, “[a]n order denying summary judgment based on qualified immunity necessarily involves a legal 3 determination that certain alleged actions violate clearly established

Jasmaine f/k/a Duane L. Fox v. Linsenby

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 13, 2021

“To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, the court must examine (1) whether the plaintiff has demonstrated that the officer violated a constitutional right and (2) whether that right was clearly … Dolgos, 884 F.3d 172, 178 (4th Cir. 2018) (internal quotation marks omitted); see Lovelace, 472 F.3d at 199 (finding that an inmate’s RLUIPA rights were clearly established in 2002 for qualified immunity purposes).

Maria Sandoval v. Peter Hish

461 F. App'x 568 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 12, 2011

The use of physical restraints, moreover, also would have violated the decedent’s clearly established right to be free from excessive force at the time of the incident. … Defendants, therefore, were not entitled to qualified immunity. AFFIRMED. 3

Leverington v. City of Colorado Springs

643 F.3d 719 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 5, 2011

be resolved as a matter of law, the law is not clearly established and qualified immunity is appropriate.” … Leverington’s free-speech rights in this context were not clearly established, and Peters is entitled to qualified immunity on this basis. In addition, it was not clearly established that Ms.

Levine v. City of Alameda

525 F.3d 903 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 13, 2008

Qualified Immunity The district court properly found that Flint was not personally liable for violating Levine’s due process rights based on qualified immunity. … Under the defense of qualified immunity, a government official is immune from civil damages unless his conduct violates a clearly established right of which a reasonable person would have known. Long v.

Tucker v. Boldo

District Court, D. Minnesota · Dec 17, 2024

In general, the doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from section 1983 liability “unless their conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person … United States, 813 F.3d 689, 696 (8th Cir. 2015) (“Whether an asserted federal right was clearly established at a particular time, so that a public official who allegedly violated the right has no qualified immunity from

Sydney Rieman v. Gloria Vazquez

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 2, 2024

The panel held that defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity from suit for failing to provide notice of the hearing. Ms. Rieman had a due process right to such notice and that right was clearly established. … immunity because they did not violate any clearly established constitutional rights.

Bell v. Lee

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 11, 2024

They also argue that Gatmen and Herron are entitled to qualified immunity 16 because they carried Bell at the direction of Lieutenant Krol. … Cnty. of Orange, 364 F.3d 1107, 1112 (9th Cir. 2004) (clearly established right to be free 7 || of excessive force encompasses “well-established” right to be free of overly tight handcuffs) (citing 8 Meredith

Jeffrey C. Rahn v. Vickie Hawkins

73 F. App'x 898 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 26, 2003

The district court found the officers were entitled to qualified immunity on the excessive-force claim and granted summary judgment to defendants on the remaining claims.1 We reverse the grant of qualified immunity, and we … We also hold that the constitutional right at issue was clearly established. See Hope v.

Capone v. Marinelli

868 F.2d 102 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 23, 1989

Because we find that the Appellants reasonably relied upon a bulletin establishing the existence of a warrant for arrest, they are entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law. … violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Leah Norton v. Heather Stille

526 F. App'x 509 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 13, 2013

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for discretionary functions performed in the course of duty so long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Stille those rights were clearly established at the time of the incident, Stille is not entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity.

Brian Cornfield, a Minor, by His Mother and Next Friend, Janet Lewis v. Consolidated High School District No. 230, Richard Spencer, and James Frye

991 F.2d 1316 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 23, 1993

“Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, public officials performing discretionary functions are protected against suits from damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Because Cornfield has not succeeded in placing the actions taken by Spencer and Frye outside a “clearly established” constitutional norm, they are entitled to qualified immunity. II.

CONONIE v. BRUNNER

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 3, 2025

In addition, Officer Brunner is entitled to qualified immunity, because he relied upon a credible report that a crime had occurred, and upon his interview with the Plaintiff, which supported his belief that a crime had … Barkes, 575 U.S. 822, 825 (2015) (“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time

Pastore v. Catron County Sheriff's Office

District Court, D. New Mexico · Nov 17, 2021

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity protects officials from civil liability as long as they do not “‘violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Regarding the clearly established law prong of a qualified immunity test, courts must not define the relevant constitutional right “at a high level of generality.” White v.

WAGNER v. CITY OF NEWARK

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 27, 2025

Defendant Henry puts forth that qualified immunity shields him from liability as Plaintiff has not pled facts demonstrating he violated a clearly established constitutional right. (D.E. 63-2 at 15.) … clearly established in light of the specific context of the case.”