Case law

DEDURO v. THE NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 18, 2025

A court analyzing a defense of qualified immunity must determine both (1) whether the plaintiff has shown a violation of a constitutional right and, (2) whether the right was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged … However, even if Kane did create such notice, single out-of-circuit case is insufficient to clearly establish a right” for purposes of qualified immunity. Porter v. Pa.

Saez v. Judicial Branch

District Court, D. Connecticut · Mar 31, 2025

Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 244 (2009) (recognizing that the qualified immunity “inquiry turns on the objective legal reasonableness of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time … See id. at 231 (“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

Cerrone v. Brown

246 F.3d 194 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 10, 2001

Fields, 230 F.3d 502, 511 (2d Cir. 2000). 15 The district court held that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity on summary judgment because (1) the law was "clearly established" at the time of the seizure … I. 17 A police officer is entitled to qualified immunity from liability for his discretionary actions if either (1) his "conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Jeanniton v. City and County of Honolulu

District Court, D. Hawaii · Aug 4, 2021

clearly established.” … The officer is entitled to qualified immunity if the law at the time of the incident did not clearly establish that the officer’s conduct violated the United States Constitution

Ronald Kincade v. City Of Blue Springs, Missouri

64 F.3d 389 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 12, 1995

"Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity when their 'conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.' " Buzek v. … public employees can never be "clearly established."

Foust v. McNeill

310 F.3d 849 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 12, 2002

Thigpen even tional right was not “clearly established” in had judicial authorization to seize certain 1998. … For a right to be “clearly established” in “fixtures” in the building, and he might have the context of qualified immunity, concluded the only reasonable way to do so

GARCIA v. CITY OF PERTH AMBOY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 4, 2024

Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. … In other words, if the official’s conduct violated a clearly established right, qualified immunity does not apply. See id. “[C]ourts are free to address the two elements in whichever order they deem appropriate.”

Christopher Kiesling v. Ross Spurlock

859 F.3d 529 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 9, 2017

The doctrine of qualified immunity “protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as then-conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … As such, the district court erred in determining that Spurlock was not entitled to qualified immunity. 7 Accordingly, the district court’s order denying qualified immunity as to Officer Spurlock is reversed. .Contrary to

Fambrough v. City of East Cleveland, Ohio

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 14, 2023

Dismissing for qualified immunity on this ground is sometimes difficult because the clearly established inquiry may turn on case-specific details that must be fleshed out in discovery.” Id. at 765. … In sum, dismissal on qualified immunity grounds is proper when the “complaint establishes the defense.” Siefert v.

Gary L. Higgason, M.D. v. Robert F. Stephens

288 F.3d 868 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 1, 2002

Qualified immunity grants government officials engaged in discretionary activities immunity from individual liability for civil damages unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … ” in nature, then the prosecutor would only be entitled to qualified immunity.

Singer v. Fulton County Sheriff

63 F.3d 110 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 9, 1995

immunity. … See Mozzochi, 959 F.2d at 1179-80 (probable cause); Magnotti, 918 F.2d at 368 (qualified immunity). As noted above, there was probable cause to arrest and charge Singer with petit larceny.

Wilson v. Escambia Board of Education

District Court, S.D. Alabama · Aug 21, 2025

“The qualified immunity defense shields ‘government officials performing discretionary functions . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … “Generally speaking, it is proper to grant a motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds when the ‘complaint fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.’”

KAISER v. DIXON

District Court, N.D. Florida · Oct 24, 2024

Additionally, FDC Defendants raise the defense of qualified immunity in their motion to dismiss. The throughline requirement in each of these areas is the presence of a constitutional violation. … to the next step of determining if a constitutional right was clearly established”).

Jensen v. Conrad

747 F.2d 185 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Oct 5, 1984

But if the underlying substantive right has not yet been clearly established, good faith immunity may be invoked regardless of the language of the statute. … The Court reasoned that if the law was not clearly established, immunity should be applied at the pretrial stage so as to minimize disruption of government activities.

Tenorio v. Pitzer

802 F.3d 1160 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 6, 2015

Qualified Immunity “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 … “Ordinarily, in order for the law to be clearly established, there must be a Su *1164 preme Court or Tenth Circuit decision on point, or the clearly established weight of authority from other courts must have found the law

Flanagan v. Munger

890 F.2d 1557 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 8, 1989

The qualified immunity standard articulated above focuses on the objective legal reasonableness of an official's conduct measured against clearly established law at the time he acted. Id. … Qualified immunity insulates Chief Munger from liability with respect to this claim because, when he acted, the law regarding the regulation of police officers' off-duty speech in this context was not clearly established.

Garanin v. City of Scranton

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 2022

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 … the right was clearly established.

Al-Turki v. Robinson

762 F.3d 1188 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 12, 2014

-2- motion for qualified immunity. … Defendant contends that even if her alleged actions violated Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment rights, she is entitled to qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established at the time of her alleged violation.

J. Pearl Bussey-Morice v. Ivette Gomez

587 F. App'x 621 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 1, 2014

Toward that end, qualified immunity protects government officials engaged in discretionary functions and sued in their individual capacities unless they violate “clearly established federal statutory or constitutional rights … Faced with these facts, we affirmed summary judgment in favor of the officers on qualified-immunity grounds because we concluded that the law was not clearly established that the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional

Duluth-Superior ILA Marine Ass'n Restated Pension Plan v. Seaway Port Authority

501 U.S. 1218 · Supreme Court of the United States · Jun 17, 1991