Case law

Brown v. Harris 6034

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 2, 2023

Qualified immunity protects officers when the law underlying the alleged violations is not clearly established. … Accordingly, the relevant right was not clearly established and Defendants are shielded by 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.

STEFANOV v. MCINTYRE

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 14, 2023

"A state official is protected by qualified immunity unless the plaintiff shows: (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged … Stefanov has failed to establish that the constitutional right that he claims was violated was clearly established, Officer McIntyre is entitled to qualified immunity on Mr.

Estate of Richard Ward v. Lucero

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 10, 2026

was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s violative conduct.” … whether that law was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

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.

Spurlock v. Satterfield

167 F.3d 995 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 11, 1999

Thus, Satterfield is not entitled to qualified immunity for these alleged acts, because they violated the plaintiffs’ clearly established constitutional rights. Y. … In rejecting Coarsey’s qualified immunity claim, the district court determined that ”[s]oIici-tation of false testimony for use in prosecuting an individual violates clearly established constitutional rights.”

Lance McNeal v. Gary Kott

590 F. App'x 566 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 4, 2014

To pierce the qualified immunity shield, McNeal must show (1) that Kott and LaLonde violated his constitutional rights and (2) that the right was “clearly established” at the time. See Leary, 528 F.3d at 441 . … Because McNeal cannot identify a violation of any “clearly established” right, Kott and LaLonde deserve qualified immunity.

Jennings v. Alexander

District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 17, 2025

Qualified Immunity Defendants assert that if Plaintiff has stated a viable claim, they are entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established at the time … established for any future qualified immunity cases involving similar circumstances.”

Kennedy v. City of Villa Hills, Ky.

635 F.3d 210 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 24, 2011

In the context of qualified immunity, preexisting, clearly established law refers to “binding precedent from the Supreme Court, the Sixth Circuit, the district court itself, or other circuits that is directly on point.” … To defeat Schutzman’s qualified- immunity defense, Kennedy must also demonstrate that his right to be free from retaliatory arrest in such a context was clearly established.

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

The Estate of Roosevelt Holliman v. Turner

District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Feb 10, 2023

constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … Once qualified immunity has been “raised as a defense by a defendant, … the plaintiffs have the burden of establishing the proof and arguments necessary to overcome it.” Strickland v. City of Crenshaw, 114 F.

Gillespie v. Boudreau

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 29, 2025

denied qualified immunity because it was clearly established— as of 1987—that prosecutors violate the Constitution when they fabricate evidence introduced at trial. 682 F.3d at 585–86 (emphasis added); see also Smith v. … clearly establish the right).

Schroeder v. Kochanowski

311 F. Supp. 2d 1241 · District Court, D. Kansas · Mar 31, 2004

The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from individual liability under § 1983 unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … reasonable in light of clearly established law.

Reardon v. State of Mississippi

District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Jun 28, 2023

Once an individual raises qualified immunity in good faith, the burden shifts “to the plaintiff, who must rebut the defense by establishing that the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law … Here, once the individual actors raised qualified immunity, the burden shifted to Reardon to point to clearly established law indicating that the individual actors’ conduct was unlawful.

Robert R. Rowe v. Fort Lauderdale

279 F.3d 1271 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 23, 2002

Qualified immunity shields government officials who perform discretionary governmental functions from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate any “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … But, by assuming the role of an investigator, he took on a qualified immunity that protected all of his actions in performing that role that did not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person in his

Herrera v. Florence McClure Women's Correctional Center

District Court, D. Nevada · Sep 9, 2025

The defendants enjoy qualified immunity from Herrera’s claims because 11 she has not shown that their conduct violated a clearly established right. 12 Qualified immunity shields government officials “from … unlawful, summary judgment based on qualified 4 immunity is appropriate.”32 5 The central dispositive inquiry for finding a right “clearly established” is “whether it

Casey v. City of Federal Heights

509 F.3d 1278 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 10, 2007

Clearly Established Law Because Officer Sweet asserts qualified immunity, we must decide not only whether Mr. … Clearly Established Law Like Officer Sweet, Officer Lor asserts qualified immunity, so we must also decide whether her use of excessive force violated “clearly established law.” Saucier, 533 U.S. at 207.

Ross W. Sorrels v. Ronald McKee David Buss Cly Evans Archie Grant Loreli, Cruthers Kay Walter Jim Blodgett Joseph Lehman

290 F.3d 965 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 17, 2002

The officials defended on grounds of qualified immunity, arguing that until the Ninth Circuit upheld the district court decision in Crofton , the law with respect to the “no gift publication” policy was not “clearly established … The law would be clearly established and defendants’ qualified immunity defense would fail.

Fambrough v. City of East Cleveland, Ohio

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 19, 2025

“The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that ‘government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Although Smedley was not entitled to qualified immunity at the motion to dismiss stage, the record before the Court on summary judgment establishes he is entitled to qualified immunity.

McClain v. Delgado

132 F.4th 362 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 20, 2025

Once qualified immunity is asserted, the burden “shifts to the plaintiff, who must rebut the defense by establishing a genuine fact issue as to whether the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established … To overcome a qualified-immunity defense, plaintiff “must show: (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct”.