Case law

Hazle v. Ford Motor Co.

464 Mich. 456 · Michigan Supreme Court · Jul 3, 2001

Therefore, we hold that a plaintiff is not required to provide evidence that he is at least as qualified as the successful candidate in order to establish a prima facie case under McDonnell Douglas. … We caution the bench and bar not to rely on Lytle for the proposition that a prima facie case of unlawful discrimination can be established merely by providing evidence that a qualified minority candidate was rejected

Skehan v. Village of Mamaroneck

465 F.3d 96 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 26, 2006

If those facts would constitute a deprivation, the court should grant qualified immunity if (1) the legal right said to be violated was not clearly established at the time of the defendant’s conduct; or (2) the defendant’ … The individual defendants’ qualified immunity turns on whether they violated clearly established federal law; the county commission’s liability turns on the allocation of law enforcement power in Alabama.

Woodward Harbor LLC v. City of Mandeville

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Mar 27, 2025

Sucette fails to plead facts sufficient to overcome the “clearly established” prong of Zuckerman’s qualified-immunity defense. “The ‘clearly established’ prong is difficult to satisfy.” Id. at 191 (citing Morrow v. … of clearly established law for qualified immunity analysis.”

Manna v. Cribari

District Court, D. Colorado · Jan 27, 2020

Early last year, the Supreme Court issued an opinion addressing the “clearly established” prong of a qualified immunity defense for a Fourth Amendment claim, in which the Court re- emphasized that “the clearly established … district court to rebut qualified immunity” and “[b]ecause Plaintiffs did not proffer clearly established authority that Ms.

Brian Ballentine v. Christopher Tucker

28 F.4th 54 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 8, 2022

The district court concluded that Detective Tucker is entitled to qualified immunity because Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights were not clearly established at the time of their arrests. … A government officer is nevertheless entitled to qualified immunity if the plaintiff’s rights were not clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct. See Pearson, 555 U.S. at 231–32.

Ryan v. Bell

District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 3, 2024

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … July 2, 2020) (finding corrections officer entitled to qualified immunity because he held an objectively reasonable belief his actions were lawful, particularly in light of that fact that “there is no clearly established

Emma Jane Prospero v. Deputy Ryan Sullivan

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 4, 2025

“[W]hen legal questions of qualified immunity are raised—either to determine whether any constitutional right was violated or whether the violation of that right was clearly established—interlocutory … Because a defendant’s “assertion of qualified immunity can be defeated only by a showing of ‘clearly established’ law, we will review not for actual probable cause but rather for ‘arguable’ probable

Silverman v. Lane

District Court, N.D. California · Jun 30, 2020

No. 75 at 17. 25 The defense of qualified immunity protects “government officials . . . from liability 26 for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Furthermore, Ninth Circuit 15 precedent regarding the use of tasers indicates that qualified immunity protects officers 16 who were reasonably mistaken in their use based on the lack of a clearly established right.

Hemostemix, Inc. v. Accudata Solutions, Inc.

District Court, D. Delaware · Feb 28, 2022

The facts pled by Aspire, considered in light of the contracts themselves, establish that Hemostemix took the actions a party normally takes when faced with what it feels is a breach of contract. … Lapina, 258 F.3d 156, 161 (3d Cir. 2001) (noting that the affirmative defense of qualified immunity “will be upheld on a 12(b)(6) motion only when the immunity is established on the face of the complaint.”

Cousins v. Lockyer

568 F.3d 1063 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 15, 2009

qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

HARDIMAN v. CHIEF

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 11, 2021

Qualified Immunity Standard "'Public officials are immune from suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless they have "violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established … Because "[t]he principle of fair notice pervades the doctrine" of qualified immunity, "clearly established law cannot be framed at a 'high level of generality.'"

Gellos

District Court, D. Arizona · Jan 30, 2026

Qualified Immunity 14 Qualified immunity shields state actors “from liability for civil damages insofar as 15 their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … The Court, in its discretion, 26 can “address the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity test first.”

Kirby v. City of Elizabeth City

388 F.3d 440 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Nov 3, 2004

First, Chief Hampton and Lieutenant Koch are entitled to qualified immunity. … Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages to the extent that "their conduct does not violate clearly established stat- utory or constitutional

Sherry Lintz Keith Lintz, Sr. Richele Nicole Jacobs Brian Allen Jacobs and Keith Lintz, Jr., by Next Friend Sherry Lintz v. Linda K. Skipski

25 F.3d 304 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 25, 1994

The district court found defendant entitled to qualified immunity because the children’s federal constitutional due process right to be free from unnecessary harm in foster homes was not clearly established until late in … but under the facts of the case held that two years was more than enough time to satisfy the “clearly established” threshold.

Baron v. Lissade

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 27, 2021

“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. Pauly, 137 S. … Because there is no clearly established law on this circuit that fabrication of evidence during an administrative bench trial ever violates the Constitution, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

CHANLEY v. CITY OF EVANSVILLE INDIANA

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 30, 2023

The Officers argue that they're entitled to qualified immunity on that claim because "an arrestee's Fourth Amendment right to medical care . . . was not a clearly established right on October 28, 2019." … 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 would have

Laura Skop v. City of Atlanta, Georgia

485 F.3d 1130 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 3, 2007

Was the Violation Clearly Established? … The second qualified immunity inquiry is, in the context of this case, straightforward: our binding precedent clearly established, at the time of Skop’s arrest, that an arrest made without arguable probable cause violates

Simms v. Rivers

District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 12, 2024

Clark, 1 F. 4th 411, 421 (5th Cir. 2021) (denying qualified immunity on the basis that prior precedent “clearly established that pretrial detainees have a Fourteenth Amendment right to medical care”). … Because this right was clearly established, they are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Lakey v. Taylor

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · May 16, 2024

Finally, because the right at issue is clearly established, officer Miller is not entitled to qualified immunity. … It was clearly established that once Mr.

Grigorescu v. Board of Trustees of the San Mateo County Community College District

District Court, N.D. California · May 24, 2024

“When the defendants are public officials asserting a qualified immunity 18 defense and the appealed issue is whether a given set of facts establishes that defendants violated 19 clearly established law,” the order … The 9 Ninth Circuit denied the principal qualified immunity, stating that the plaintiff’s “right to express 10 political views, even as a public school teacher, is clearly established.