Case law

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.

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.”

Gordon v. Holly Springs School District

District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Sep 27, 2021

Thomas, 843 F.3d 172, 177 (5th Cir. 2016) (“Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right.”) (quoting Mace v. … Qualified immunity calls for a bifurcated test in which the court must first determine (1) “whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established statutory or constitutional right that 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

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).

T.D. v. Patton

868 F.3d 1209 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 28, 2017

Patton addresses only the second prong of her qualified-immunity defense— whether she violated a clearly established constitutional right. … Patton does not persuade us that she is entitled to qualified immunity for lack of clearly established law. i. Post-custody conduct Ms.

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.

Hamid Yazdianpour v. Safeblood Technologies, Inc.

779 F.3d 530 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 27, 2015

Ct. 884, 891-92 (2011) (“Ordinarily, orders denying summary judgment do not qualify as ‘final decisions’ subject to appeal [under 28 U.S.C. § 1291].”); 28 U.S.C. § 2107(a) (requiring appeal be filed within thirty days after … As Wanlass dealt with constructive knowledge for purposes of a laches defense, it is inapposite to the issue whether Licensees can establish justifiable reliance for purposes of a fraud claim under Arkansas law.

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.

X-Men Security, Inc. v. Governor George Pataki

196 F.3d 56 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 2, 1999

, contending principally that the complaint failed to allege the violation of any clearly established constitutional right and that, in any event, they were entitled to qualified immunity because it was objectively reasonable … Thus, when the district court has denied a qualified-immunity motion, its rulings that the plaintiff has sufficiently alleged the violation of a constitutional right and that--that right was clearly established at the time

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.

Perry v. Spencer

94 F.4th 136 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 21, 2024

The District Court granted summary judgment to the defendants based on qualified immunity after determining that, at the relevant time, clearly established law did not treat such prolonged solitary … immunity because the law was not clearly established at the time.

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.

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.

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.

Vorobyev v. Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 31, 2022

Moreover, we find that the law was not clearly established at the time of Wolfe’s alleged violative act; therefore, Wolfe is shielded by the doctrine of qualified immunity. … the right was clearly established.