Case law

Chambers v. Puff

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 8, 2021

Lemmon, 911 F.3d 412, 419 (7th Cir. 2018) (finding waiver where plaintiff did not address the “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity in the district court). … What this argument ignores is the fact that qualified immunity is a question of law for the Court to decide; the existence of a clearly established right is not an issue for a jury. Brown v. Knapp, 156 F.

Jesse Richardson v. Sergeant Curtis Bonds

860 F.2d 1427 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 29, 1988

On February 29,1988, Judge Holder-man granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, based on the defense of qualified immunity. … established law.

Maurice Olivier v. Leroy Baca

913 F.3d 852 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 11, 2019

The burden is on the party contesting qualified immunity to show that a law was clearly established at the time of an alleged violation. Davis v. Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 197–98 (1984). … Finally, we reject Olivier’s argument that collateral estoppel should have prevented Baca from claiming qualified immunity.

James Carey v. Nevada Gaming Control Board Gregory Spendlove State of Nevada

279 F.3d 873 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 4, 2002

If we had only the Supreme Court's precedents to guide us, we might also conclude that the right was not clearly established. … We think this is sufficient to clearly establish the right in our circuit.

Johnson v. City of San Antonio

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 20, 2023

Jurisdiction & standard of review: “Qualified immunity shields public officials sued in their individual capacities from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … This is the second step of the qualified-immunity inquiry. See Melton, 875 F.3d at 261 (observing that the plaintiff must show that “the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct”).

Haynes v. Marshall

887 F.2d 700 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 12, 1989

"[T]he right the official is alleged to have violated must have been 'clearly established' " in a particularized sense, Anderson v. … They suggest, however, that there was no clearly established standard by which to measure whether they used excessive force, until 1986 when the Supreme Court announced its opinion in Whitley v.

Wynn-Thomas v. Dempsey

District Court, D. Nebraska · Jul 20, 2022

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability in a 42 U.S.C. §1983 action when their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or … “Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense for which the defendant carries the burden of proof. The plaintiff, however, must demonstrate that the law is clearly established.” Sparr v.

Lundgren v. Freeman

307 F.2d 104 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 27, 1962

Civ.P., which provides that: “findings of fact shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous * * Therefore, we may not substitute our judgment if conflicting inferences may be drawn from the established facts by reasonable … Like the issue of wrongful purpose, we feel that the issue as to the existence of quasi-arbitrators’ qualified immunity is a question of fact.

Zhi Chen v. District of Columbia

808 F. Supp. 2d 252 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 9, 2011

insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Layne, 526 U.S. 603, 614 , 119 S.Ct. 1692 , 143 L.Ed.2d 818 (1999) (holding that qualified immunity turns upon the “objective legal reasonableness of the officers’ action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly

(PC) Edwards v. Swarthout

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 25, 2024

Defendant argues, third, he is entitled to qualified 15 immunity because it was not clearly established in 2010 that a modified program based partly … City of Roseville, 9 882 F.3d 843, 856-57 (9th Cir. 2018) (holding that Ninth Circuit precedent is sufficient to meet 10 the “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity).

Armijo Ex Rel. Armijo Sanchez v. Peterson

601 F.3d 1065 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 13, 2010

Qualified immunity “protects governmental officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … The qualified immunity inquiry has two elements: whether a constitutional violation occurred, and whether the violated right was “clearly established” at the time of the violation. Pearson, 129 S.Ct. at 815-16 .

Lisa Bergman v. Jeremy Howard

54 F.4th 950 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 12, 2022

To qualify as “clearly established,” a principle must originate from an actual Supreme Court holding, not from its passing dicta. See White v. Woodall, 572 U.S. 415, 419 (2014). … Did the Michigan court’s refusal to provide this different type of state-funded expert qualify as an “unreasonable application” of Ake’s clearly established holding? We think not.

Kendoll

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 26, 2026

whether Gardner is entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity Having found that plaintiff’s constitutional rights were not violated, Gardner is also entitled to qualified immunity. See Cuevas v.

Bustos v. Martini Club, Inc.

599 F.3d 458 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 5, 2010

wrong.” 14 We must determine if the Texas Supreme Court decision renders Meadours clearly wrong. … Lyford, 243 F.3d 185, 191 n.18 (5th Cir. 2001) (explaining that a municipality may be liable if a plaintiff states a claim against an official but the official is protected by qualified immunity). 51 Curley

Watkins v. City of Oakland

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

Although the use of excessive force in effecting an arrest is a clearly established violation of the Fourth Amendment, Watkins’ legal right cannot be so general as to allow him to “convert the rule of qualified immunity . … established for purposes of determining whether the officers have qualified immunity.

Rombach v. Culpepper

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 13, 2021

a clearly established constitutional right.” … Sheehan, 575 U.S. 600, 613 (2015) (“Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.”).

In re Possible Violations of 18 USC 371, 641, 1503

564 F.2d 567 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 2, 1977

In particular, the Court observed *86 that official harassment of the press undertaken solely to disrupt a reporter’s relationship with news sources would clearly be subject to judicial control. 18 In a separate opinion, … A newsman can claim no general immunity, qualified or otherwise, from grand jury questioning. On the contrary, like all other witnesses, he must appear and normally must answer.

Burden v. Carroll

108 F. App'x 291 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 12, 2004

Qualified Immunity Mitchell v. … Qualified immunity affords government officials an immunity from suit “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known” (Harlow

KELLEY v. REYES

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 1, 2025

That is not how qualified immunity works. Qualified immunity is determined on a claim-by-claim basis, See Behrens v. … Pa, 2018) (“It would be strange to say that right X is clearly established just because right Y is clearly established and happens to prohibitthe same conduct.”), On this basis alone, reconsideration is improper

Nelson Edwards v. Michael Jolliff-Blake

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 1, 2018

  that  constitutional  right  was  clearly  established  at  the  time  of  the  alleged  violation.”  …   immunity);  Junkert,  610 F.3d at 370 (concluding officers were entitled to qualified  immunity based on  their reasonable  belief that  the  affidavit  established probable cause even though it left “much to be de‐ sired”)