Case law

EFIRD v. ROCKINGHAM COUNTY SHERIFF SAMUEL SCOTT PAGE

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 31, 2025

Further, under Fourth Circuit precedent, where an officer is denied qualified immunity, he is likewise not entitled to public official immunity. See Bailey v. … Kennedy, 349 F.3d 731, 742 (4th Cir. 2003) (noting that North Carolina public official immunity is “unavailable to officers who violate clearly established rights”); Cooper v.

Thomas W. Hill v. Department of the Air Force Paul J. Vallerie, and Paul S. Britt

884 F.2d 1318 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 6, 1989

Britt filed a motion to dismiss alleging absolute and qualified immunity. The district court dismissed part of the fifth cause of action on absolute immunity grounds. It did not discuss qualified immunity. … On appeal, “[w]e need not confine our review, however, to the viability of the qualified immunity defense.” Carlson v.

Rodriguez-Mateo v. Fuentes-Agostini

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · May 30, 2003

Dep't for Children, Youth & Their Families , 321 F.3d 1, 4 (lst Cir. 2003) (qualified immunity applies if the asserted constitutional right was not "clearly established" at the time of the alleged violation). (6) Appellant … Although appellees' entitlement to immunity precludes any need to address the issue substantively, we wish to indicate that even if it had been clearly established that the Fourth Amendment embraced malicious prosecution,

Dyjak v. Miller

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Mar 29, 2024

and (2) whether the right alleged to have been violated was clearly established. … Liebel, 877 F.3d 346 (7th Cir. 2017) (affirming qualified immunity, and holding that Turner merely creates a generalized framework to analyze claims and cannot create clearly established law

Harris v. Commissioner

16 F.3d 75 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 10, 1994

Helvering, 293 U.S. 465, 55 S.Ct. 266, 79 L.Ed. 596 (1935) (holding that a transaction, although qualifying in form, failed to qualify in substance as a reorganization because "[t]o hold otherwise would be to exalt artifice … We must, however, accept the Tax Court's findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. Commissioner v. Duberstein, 363 U.S. 278, 291, 80 S.Ct. 1190, 1200, 4 L.Ed.2d 1218 (1960).

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”.

Estate of Ryan L. Clark v. Tina Kuehn

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 26, 2017

First, he argues that it is “doubtful” whether cir‐ cuit precedent can clearly establish law for purposes of quali‐ fied  immunity.  … Finally, Walker argues that the clearly established prohibi‐ tion on deliberate indifference to prisoners’ and jail inmates’  risk of suicide is too general to be enforceable for purposes of  qualified immunity. 

Winfield v. Trottier

710 F.3d 49 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 6, 2013

However, since this right was not 28 clearly established at the time of the search, Trottier is 29 entitled to qualified immunity. … immunity if the right 3 he violated was not “clearly established” at the time of the 4 events at issue.

98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4057, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 5623 Nathaniel Watkins v. City of Oakland, California Joseph Samuels, Jr. Craig Chew E. Lewis, Officer T. Chu

145 F.3d 1087 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 29, 1998

"When a law enforcement officer asserts qualified immunity from liability for Fourth Amendment violations, the district court must determine whether, in light of clearly established principles governing the conduct in question … established for purposes of determining whether the officers have qualified immunity. 25 Id. at 1362 .

George Wingate v. Scott Fulford

987 F.3d 299 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 4, 2021

The burden of establishing a qualified immunity defense rests on the official asserting the defense. Meyers v. Baltimore County, 713 F.3d 723, 731 (4th 2013). … But because this right was not clearly established at the time of the arrest, the Officers are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. 21

Banks v. Booher

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 5, 2025

The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … Defendants do not explain their argument for qualified immunity, beyond asserting that plaintiffs’ claims do not violate a “clearly established right of Native American/Indigenous inmates to have

Walker v. Donahoe

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 27, 2019

Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages in § 1983 actions “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … the qualified immunity analysis.

Mecham v. Frazier

500 F.3d 1200 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 11, 2007

Even if the officers’ use of pepper spray was not objectively reasonable, M echam has failed to meet the other requirement necessary to defeat qualified immunity— that the law was clearly established at the time of the … , the officers w ere entitled to qualified immunity because no clearly established law foreclosed the use of force in the circumstances here.

Donald Jackson v. Pearl Public School Distr

626 F. App'x 80 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 15, 2015

Although we express no opinion as to whether the school officials’ conduct was constitutionally infirm, we conclude that the school officials are entitled to qualified immunity because it was not “clearly established” in … Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff shows (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was “clearly established” at the

Strand v. Minchuk

910 F.3d 909 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 8, 2018

For the law to be clearly established-the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis-the "existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate." … This same factual dispute also prevents us from concluding, as Officer Minchuk urges, that Strand's clearly established constitutional rights were not violated, the second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry.

Moore v. Andreno

505 F.3d 203 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 22, 2007

A defendant will be entitled to qualified immunity if either (1) his actions did not violate clearly established law or (2) it was objectively reasonable for him to believe that his actions did not violate clearly established … Because we believe that, at the time of the search, the law was not clearly established as to whether Sines had authority to consent to a search of the study, Deputies Andreno and Palmer are entitled to qualified immunity

Miles LaCross v. City of Duluth

713 F.3d 1155 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 8, 2013

-3- Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability and the burdens of litigation in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established … Accordingly, Mark is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate LaCross’s then clearly established constitutional rights.

ATHEISTS OF FLORIDA v. City of Lakeland, Fla.

779 F. Supp. 2d 1330 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 15, 2011

Qualified Immunity Defendants also urge this Court to dismiss all claims against Lakeland Mayor Gow Fields because, at least according to Defendants, Defendant Fields enjoys qualified immunity from suit. … “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

United States v. Abel Casarez-Bravo, D.C. No

181 F.3d 1074 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 22, 1999

B Although the 1986 conviction did not-qualify as a predicate conviction, the district court only needed to find two qualifying predicate convictions for Casarez-Bravo to be considered a career criminal under the Sentencing … United States, 511 U.S. 485 , 114 S.Ct. 1732 , 128 L.Ed.2d 517 (1994). 1 In addition to the statutory definition, we may also examine “ ‘documentation or judicially noticeable facts that clearly establish that the conviction

ESTATE OF TAVARIS McGUIRE v. BAKER

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 4, 2022

"Qualified immunity attaches when an official's conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." White v. … The Court then turns to the next question in the qualified immunity analysis which is whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time McGuire was arrested and under the circumstances presented.