Case law

Tanzin v. Tanvir

592 U.S. 43 · Supreme Court of the United States · Dec 10, 2020

By the time Congress enacted RFRA, this Court had interpreted the modern ver- sion of §1983 to permit monetary recovery against officials who violated “clearly established” federal law. E.g., Procu- nier v. … who flout clearly established law,” Tr. of Oral Arg. 42; see District of Co- lumbia v.

Harvey v. City of Galveston

District Court, S.D. Texas · Jul 17, 2025

Hanna, 726 F.3d 631, 638 (5th Cir. 2013) (qualified immunity requires alleging a violation of a clearly established constitutional right at the time of the conduct). … Because the complaint plausibly alleges facts supporting a violation of clearly established right under the Fourteenth Amendment, Roy is not entitled to qualified immunity at this stage.

Germaine Smart v. COII Ronald England

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 16, 2024

He found that qualified immunity barred Smart’s complaint because no clearly established law pro- hibited the officials from disciplining Smart. … Defendants cannot benefit from the shield of qualified immunity by arguing the law was not clearly established.

Villot v. Varner

465 F. Supp. 2d 439 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 29, 2006

The “clearly established Federal law” which governs ineffective- assistance of counsel claims is the two-pronged standard set forth in Strickland v. … Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 363 , 120 S.Ct. 1495 , 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000) (stating that the “Strickland test qualifies as ‘clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court’ ”).

Limon v. City of Laredo

District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 4, 2025

Qualified immunity shields government officials from § 1983 liability unless their conduct violates a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct. Mace v. … To overcome qualified immunity on his excessive force claim, Christian must show that Officer Martinez violated a constitutional right and that the right was clearly established. Guerra v.

Leise v. Christie

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 27, 2025

immunity because releasing the Investigative Report did not violate clearly established law. … A qualified immunity analysis considers whether: “(1) . . . the official violated a statutory right or constitutional right, and (2) . . . the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”

Nathaniel Brent v. Wayne Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs.

555 F. App'x 519 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 6, 2014

Alternatively, they contend that the rights that the district court identified were not clearly established and, therefore, qualified immunity shields them. … But on a claim of qualified immunity, “[t]he plaintiff has the burden of establishing that the law was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” Andrews v.

Kompare v. Stein

801 F.2d 883 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 4, 1986

violate clearly established rights. … Any doubt as to whether the prosecution was without probable cause must be *892 resolved in favor of the defendant because she has qualified immunity unless she violated a clearly established right.

Borton v. City of Dothan

734 F. Supp. 2d 1237 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Aug 24, 2010

Clearly Established Having found sufficient evidence of excessive force on the part of Officer Schulmerich, the court addresses the second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry concerning whether the constitutional right … was clearly established at the time of the tasing.

FREEMAN v. SANCHEZ

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 20, 2025

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from personal liability for civil damages under section 1983 … clearly established right”).

Steven Manning v. Gary Miller, Federal Bureau of Investigation Agent, and Robert Buchan, Federal Bureau of Investigation Agent

355 F.3d 1028 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 21, 2004

Similarly, Manning is able to meet the second prong of the qualified immunity test: his constitutional due process right was “clearly established” at the time he asserts it was violated. … established at that time, Agents Buchan and Miller cannot prevail on their qualified immunity claim.

Commonwealth v. Packer

568 Pa. 481 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 31, 2002

This interpretation is contrary to the well-established cannon of construction that courts should generally apply qualifying words or phrases to the words immediately preceding them. 1 Pa.C.S. § 1903; Midboe v. … Qualifying words “do not extend to or include other words, phrases, or clauses more remote, unless such extension or inclusion is clearly required by the intent or meaning of the context or disclosed by an examination of

Roe v. Johnson County

District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 1, 2021

No. 284—is needed to establish that Blankenship is not entitled to qualified immunity. … Jan. 18, 2021) (Under the clearly-established prong, “‘the dispositive question is whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.’

Estate of De'Angelo Brown v. West

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 30, 2022

Andrews, 972 F.3d 1007 (8th Cir. 2020) (examining when a right is clearly established for qualified immunity analysis). Moore, 514 F.3d at 760. … Andrews, 972 F.3d 1007 (8th Cir. 2020) (examining when a right is clearly established for qualified immunity analysis).

Roxana Santos v. Frederick County Board of Commissioners

725 F.3d 451 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 7, 2013

established’ for purposes of qualified immunity”); see also Hope v. … established for qualified immunity purposes.”

Allen v. City of New York

480 F. Supp. 2d 689 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 27, 2007

Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … that were clearly established at the time it was taken.”

Marina P. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security

214 Ariz. 326 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Feb 20, 2007

To the extent findings are not adequately supported by the record, they are clearly erroneous. Grant v. Ariz. Pub. Serv. Co., 133 Ariz. 434, 456 , 652 P.2d 507, 529 (1982). B. … prevented Mother from parenting the children that Mother has substantially neglected or willfully refused to remedy. ¶30 Missing one visit and being late for two others fourteen months prior to the severance trial hardly qualifies

Hinshaw v. Smith

436 F.3d 997 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 30, 2006

(internal marks omitted). 16 Qualified immunity protects public officials from personal liability under § 1983 when "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … The court held that the legislators, who were not the decisionmakers, were entitled to qualified immunity because there was no clearly established federal right for an individual "to prevent legislators from exercising their

Duncan v. Walker

533 U.S. 167 · Supreme Court of the United States · Jun 18, 2001

V) establishes the limitation period for filing § 2254 petitions in state capital cases that arise from jurisdictions meeting the "opt-in" requirements of § 2261. … In fact, the "argument from neighbors" shows only that Congress might have spoken more clearly than it did. It cannot prove the statutory point.

Chimelis v. County of Suffolk

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 11, 2025

Qualified Immunity Government actors may invoke qualified immunity to shield themselves from liability for civil damages “‘when [their] conduct does not violate clearly … Qualified Immunity Police Defendants then assert qualified immunity for Plaintiff’s excessive force claim because they contend that there is no “clearly established law