Case law

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. … In denying defendant’s qualified immunity motion, the district court concluded that Thomas v. Pate had clearly established the right at issue. This reliance was misplaced. As noted above, Thomas v.

Allen v. Pacheco

District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 11, 2020

a clearly established constitutional right.’” … As Officer Suttle did not raise the qualified immunity issue for any other claims, Allen did not have a sufficient opportunity to respond regarding qualified immunity for those claims

Governmental Interinsurance Exchange v. Judge

Illinois Supreme Court · May 18, 2006

City of Aurora, 71 Ill. 2d 1, 11 (1978) (AThis court has clearly established the rule that once a governmental unit >adopts a plan in the making of public improvements,= it owes a duty to a plaintiff to maintain those improvements … AThe above regulations clearly establish that, contrary to the dissent=s statement *** a broken yellow line does indicate a passing zone.

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.”

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.”

Wright v. 15th District Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office

District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 4, 2025

Lastly, the Court agrees with the Report that Deputy Di Orsini is entitled to qualified immunity, because Count 5 fails to allege any constitutional violations, let alone any “clearly established” constitutional violations … App’x 870, 875 (4th Cir. 2004).], none of that would signal a violation of a “clearly established” constitutional right in this Circuit as would be required to overcome qualified immunity. See Chesser v.

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.

Justin Parsons v. City of Pontiac

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 24, 2008

“If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.” Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201. … But under § 1983, “an arresting agent is entitled to qualified immunity if he or she could reasonably (even if erroneously) have believed that the arrest was lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information

Pedro Rivera v. Don Bell

509 F. App'x 628 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 19, 2013

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Rivera’s excessive force claim under the doctrine of qualified immunity because Rivera failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant used … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231-32 (2009) (defendants were entitled to qualified immunity where there is no violation of plaintiff’s constitutional right or the right at issue was not “clearly established”).

Morgan v. Union County

268 N.J. Super. 337 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 16, 1993

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages when they perform discretionary functions, unless their acts violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … In our view, the presentment was highly relevant respecting the defense 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.

Mitchell v. Rice

954 F.2d 187 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 10, 1992

In reviewing appellants’ qualified immunity defense, we look to substantive Eighth Amendment law as established at the time of the alleged violations. … Because the record in this case does not adequately address all the issues necessary to determine whether prison officials violated clearly established law, we cannot grant qualified immunity at this time.

McDougald v. Clagg

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 5, 2021

In other words, plaintiffs must articulate why the asserted constitutional rights count as “clearly established,” or else qualified immunity bars those claims. … retaliation claim, McDougald once again waived the clearly-established prong of qualified immunity with respect to that claim.

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.

Wilson v. Kelkhoff

86 F.3d 1438 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 18, 1996

P. 12(b)(6), arguing that Wilson’s complaint failed to state a claim because, among other things, Brown, Moore, and Wells were entitled to absolute or qualified immunity and Kelkhoff was entitled to qualified immunity. … The question of whether a particular constitutional right is clearly established is reviewed de novo. Maltby v. Winston, 36 F.3d 548, 555 (7th Cir.1994), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 115 S.Ct. 2576 , 132 L.Ed.2d 827 (1995).

Buckner v. Lower Florida Keys Hosp. Dist.

403 So. 2d 1025 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 11, 1981

To support a cause of action for conspiracy to defame, it is therefore incumbent upon a plaintiff to properly allege those elements which would establish a defamation, one of which is a publication. Barry College v. … Although some do not heed to the pleading requirements, it is still mandatory under established precedent that a complaint must allege ultimate facts. Ocala Loan Company v. Smith, 155 So.2d 711 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963).

Laborde-Garcia v. Puerto

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · May 18, 1993

The district court entered __________ an injunction ordering the Company to reinstate her, and it denied the individual defendants' claims of "qualified immunity." … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 , 638-41 ___ ________ _________ (1987) (state actors have qualified immunity unless -8- 8 precedent would have alerted reasonable person that action would infringe "clearly established" constitutional

Perkins

District Court, M.D. Alabama · Feb 3, 2026

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials from personal liability “for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Thus, Plaintiff also must show that the right allegedly violated by Commissioner Hamm was clearly established to overcome qualified immunity.

Fye v. Oklahoma Corp. Commission

175 F. App'x 207 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 6, 2006

When a defendant raises the defense of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must establish that the defendant’s conduct violated a federal constitutional or statutory right and that the right was clearly established at the time … Bode’s complete inaction in the face of actual knowledge, if proven, violated a constitutional right that was, at the time, clearly established, and she is not entitled to qualified immunity.

Diana G. Schlegel and Central Pacific Freight Lines, an Oregon Corporation v. William Bebout and Bob Russell

841 F.2d 937 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 8, 1988

The Court pointed out that the right to due process of law is quite clearly established by the Due Process Clause, and thus it could follow that any action that violates that clause violates a clearly established right regardless … Based upon these principles, appellants are entitled to immunity if they can prove that a reasonable PUC official could have believed that the action taken was lawful, in light of clearly established law.