Case law

Anne Marie Gennusa v. Brian Canova

748 F.3d 1103 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 8, 2014

Canova were not protected by qualified immunity. Det. Marmo and Sgt. … The district court also denied qualified immunity to Det. Marmo and Sgt. Canova.

Oldson v. Burnett

District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Feb 14, 2024

Lucas Cnty., 799 F.3d 530, 539–42 (6th Cir. 2015) (determining that a supervisor did not enjoy qualified immunity after finding that the right violated by the excessively forceful subordinates was clearly established). … violated clearly established law.’”

Magnolia Island Plantation v. Whittington

29 F.4th 246 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 21, 2022

That party—in this case, Lollar— must then show that (1) the “official’s conduct violated a constitutional right” of the opponent of immunity, and (2) “the right was clearly established at the time of the violation … Here, we need not examine the “clearly established” prong, because Lollar has failed to meet her burden of showing a constitutional violation. 5 Case: 20-30805 Document

Kounelis v. Sherrer

529 F. Supp. 2d 503 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 3, 2008

Thus, having found that the alleged facts established the violation of a constitutional right and that the constitutional right was clearly established, the Court denied qualified immunity to Sergeants James and Perez. … established at the time of the alleged violation, the Court has limited its qualified immunity analysis to Kounelis's excessive force claim. 12 .

Christopher Bates v. Thomas Hadden

576 F. App'x 636 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 19, 2014

Because Bates did not establish that Officer Hadden violated his constitutional or statutory rights, Officer Hadden was entitled to qualified immunity. … City of Rochester, 643 F.3d 1031, 1042 (8th Cir. 2011) (en banc) (citation omitted).3 "Officials being sued under § 1983 are entitled to qualified immunity for actions that did not violate a clearly established constitutional

Boysen v. Peacehealth

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 19, 2024

Defendants in a Section 1983 action are entitled to qualified immunity from damages for civil liability if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … For purposes of qualified immunity, “[a] right is clearly established when it is sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right.” Rivas-Villegas v.

Brown v. Tromba

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 29, 2026

City of Tulare, 107 F.4th 894, 898 (9th Cir. 2024) (“Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness … of their conduct was clearly established at the time.”

Amie Marie Beers-Capitol Aliya Tate v. Barry Whetzel, an Individual Shirley Robinson, in Her Official Capacity Robert Liggett, in His Individual and Official Capacity Youth Development Center at New Castle Nora Burley, in Her Individual and Official Capacity Nick Pihiou, in His Individual and Official Capacity John Doe, in His/her Individual and Official Capacity Charles Lee Earnhart, in His Individual and Official Capacity Joseph Flecher, in His Individual and Official Capacity (d.c. Civil No. 97-Cv-00292). Aliya Tate v. Barry Whetzel, in His Individual Capacity Shirley Robinson, in Her Individual and Official Capacity Robert Liggett, in His Individual and Official Capacity Youth Development Center at New Castle John Doe, in His/her Individual and Official Capacity, Nora Burley, in Her Individual and Official Capacity Nick Pihiou, in His Individual and Official Capacity (d.c. Civil No. 97-Cv-00313)

256 F.3d 120 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 11, 2001

claim to qualified immunity. … That is, Burley is entitled to qualified immunity only if she can show that a reasonable person in her position at the relevant time could have believed, in light of clearly established law, that her conduct comported with

Katrina Reeves v. Howard Meddings

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 14, 2025

Reeves’s clearly established rights. … Reeves’ clearly established rights.

Carthew v. County of Suffolk

709 F. Supp. 2d 188 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 6, 2010

Thus, qualified immunity is warranted. … The doctrine of qualified immunity shields 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.

BERK v. HOLLINGSWORTH

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 23, 2020

Because Plaintiff has not stated a claim of a violation of his federal rights, Defendants are also entitled to qualified immunity. See Reichle v. … was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”).

Sonny Boy, LLC v. Asnani

879 So. 2d 25 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 28, 2004

In my view, two different standards were intended and clearly imposed by these provisions. … Clearly section 718.303(1) was not involved, nor was it mentioned.

Sean DeCrane v. Edward Eckart

12 F.4th 586 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 1, 2021

The district court denied Eckart qualified immunity on this argument, holding that our precedent clearly established that DeCrane would have tipped off the media as a private citizen rather than a public employee. … He next needed to overcome Eckart’s qualified-immunity defense by showing that Eckart’s conduct violated clearly established law. See Wesby, 138 S. Ct. at 589.

Cheryl D. Lyons v. City of Xenia, Christine Keith, Officer Matthew Foubert, Officer

417 F.3d 565 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 4, 2005

After considering the Supreme Court’s treatment of similar qualified-immunity issues in Brosseau , we now extend qualified immunity to Officer Foubert for Lyons’ excessive-force tackling claim. … The district court likewise rejected the officers’ qualified immunity defenses.

Sanford v. Kirst

District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Jun 16, 2023

of a clearly established statutory or constitutional right. … in light of clearly established law.

Munt v. Roy

District Court, D. Minnesota · Sep 13, 2019

of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity depends upon whether the plaintiff has stated a plausible claim for violation of a constitutional right and whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct, such that

Morais v. Yee

162 Vt. 366 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Jul 15, 1994

We agree that defendants should not have been granted summary judgment on the state law claims, but conclude that qualified immunity does not apply in this case. … However, qualified immunity does not extend to situations in which the legislature establishes a clear duty and liability for a breach of that duty.

Alfred

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Oct 16, 2025

Lee, 946 F.2d 1152, 1159 (5th Cir. 1991) (federal common law recognizes a qualified privilege protecting investigative files in an ongoing criminal investigation). … Federal courts “overwhelmingly treat this privilege as a qualified one, which is subject to a balancing process that may lead to court-ordered disclosure of privileged materials, and which may be subject to waiver by the

Rancho del Oso Pardo, Inc. v. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish

District Court, D. New Mexico · Sep 15, 2022

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … a right was clearly established.

Debra Sue Rodriguez and MacEdonio Coc Rodriguez v. Donna Marie Currey

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 3, 2025

This occurs when an order violates “a clearly established” legal principle. See id. at 355. “A classic example . . . is a trial court’s failure to follow binding precedent.” State Farm Fla. Ins. Co. v. … 355 (“There is an important difference between a departure from the essential requirements of law where there has been a violation of a clearly established principle of law and a case that involves an issue of law where