Case law

Garcia v. Does 1-40

779 F.3d 84 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 21, 2014

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability for civil damages when one of two conditions is satisfied: (a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was … Defendants bear the burden of establishing qualified immunity. Vincent v. Yelich, 718 F.3d 157, 166 (2d Cir.2013).

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.

REDMON v. SHROPSHIRE

District Court, M.D. Georgia · Feb 23, 2022

establishing that Ford’s actions were unconstitutional, he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (“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

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

Wallisa v. City of Hesparia

369 F. Supp. 3d 990 · District Court, C.D. California · Mar 20, 2019

"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 reasonable person … The qualified immunity analysis involves two distinct steps, determining: (1) whether the facts alleged by a plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) if so, whether the right was "clearly established

Machete Productions, L.L.C. v. Heather Page

809 F.3d 281 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 28, 2015

4 To overcome an official’s qualified immunity, a plaintiff must plead facts demonstrating “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of … Accordingly, Machete cannot establish that it had a clearly established right to these funds that Morales violated. See Ashcroft, 131 S. Ct. at 2080.

Occupy Columbia v. Nikki Haley

738 F.3d 107 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 16, 2013

In addressing Appellants’ qualified immunity arguments, the district court first agreed with Appellants “that it was not clearly established at the time … June 12, 2013) (denying qualified immunity for state officials and holding that “plaintiffs had a clearly established right to utilize the Plaza to engage in overnight protest activity”).

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,

Jones v. Milsteen

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 27, 2023

Finally, on the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, Jones’ right to be free from excessive force was clearly established at the time of the violation, because a robust consensus of persuasive Court of Appeals … doctrine, and its contention that qualified immunity bars the claim is without merit.

Fenn v. City of Truth or Consequences

District Court, D. New Mexico · Nov 6, 2019

immunity prong, and that Defendants Alirez and Apodaca are entitled to qualified immunity under the second “clearly established” prong. … Plaintiff’s failure to carry his burden of showing the law was clearly established entitles Defendants to qualified immunity. See Cox v.

Olmsted v. Douglas County

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 31, 2023

Government officials are not entitled to qualified immunity if their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Rivas-Villegas v. … See Id. at 657 (“Our qualified-immunity cases illustrate the importance of drawing inferences in favor of the nonmovant, even when . . . a court decides only the clearly-established prong of the standard.”); Anderson, 477

Thompson v. Ohio State University

990 F. Supp. 2d 801 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 6, 2014

It is not necessarily true that the exact factual circumstances alleged in a given case must have been found to be a constitutional violation before a right can be “clearly established” for purposes of a qualified immunity … Salimbene’s claim of qualified immunity, it is clearly established that a public official’s retaliation against an individual for exercising First Amendment rights violates 42 U.S.C. § 1983 .

The Cloister East, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 28, 2021

”''® However, “[e]ven where the law is clearly established and the scope of an official’s permissible conduct is clearly defined, the qualified immunity defense also protects an official if it was objectively reasonable … “Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined” at such a high level of generality. /d.

Canary v. Osborn

211 F.3d 324 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 3, 2000

It is the defendants’ burden to establish the the title of one of its substitute teachers, it voted to not renew existence of absolute legislative immunity. See Kamplain v. … as established by Bogan v.

Natia Sampson v. County of Los Angeles

974 F.3d 1012 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 9, 2020

But, critically, the 2011 case did not reach the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity analysis and said nothing about whether the right was clearly established prior to 2011. See Glenn, 673 F.3d at 870. … Therefore, because the same clearly established right at issue in Capp is also at issue here, the cases that supported denial of qualified immunity in Capp also compel us to deny qualified immunity in the instant case. 4

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

Terebesi v. Torreso

764 F.3d 217 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 21, 2014

But the doctrine of qualified immunity shields both state and federal officials from suit “unless [1] the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that [2] was clearly established at the time of the challenged … “An officer is not entitled to qualified immunity on the grounds that the law is not clearly established every time a novel method is used to inflict injury.” 20 Mendoza v.

Parks v. Blanchette

144 F. Supp. 3d 282 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Nov 4, 2015

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity for the *300 retaliation and deliberate indifference claims 8 , because the rights at issue were not sufficiently clearly established at the … “A government official performing a discretionary function is entitled to qualified immunity provided his or her ‘conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Lankamer v. Lalley

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 9, 2024

“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. … That right is clearly established.”); Snukis, 2022 WL 2305697, at *7 (denying qualified immunity at the motion to dismiss stage because “it was clearly established that Snukis had a Fourth Amendment right to prompt medical

Kennedy v. City of Ridgefield

439 F.3d 1055 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 7, 2006

Southwest Airlines, 124 F.3d 1103, 1107 (9th Cir.1997) ("[W]e have jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity where the appeal focuses on whether the defendants violated a clearly established … I would hold that, taking into account the "specific context of th[is] case," the right was not clearly established at the time Officer Shields acted, and Shields is thus entitled to qualified immunity.