Case law

Fischbach & Moore, Inc. v. United States

470 U.S. 1029 · Supreme Court of the United States · Mar 4, 1985

Donovan v. Bel-Loc Diner, Inc.

780 F.2d 1113 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 18, 1985

The evidence as a whole clearly suffices to establish the existence of a pattern or practice, at least as a “just and reasonable inference.” … While, again, there was some evidence tending to show that some employees may not have been victims of the general pattern that was established prima facie, it clearly did not constitute the sort of evidence of precise work

Guthrie v. Wetzel

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 12, 2022

The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that government officials performing “discretionary functions,” are shielded from suit if their conduct did not violate a “clearly established statutory or constitutional right … if so, 2) whether those rights were “clearly established” at the time of the incident.

Lynne Meredith Gayle Bybee Jenifer Meredith Bernadette Keller Carla Figaro, the People of California, Ex Rel. v. Andrew Erath

342 F.3d 1057 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 8, 2003

Before today, however, it had not been clearly established that this conduct would violate Bybee’s constitutional rights. Therefore, as to this portion of Bybee’s claim, Agent Erath is entitled to qualified immunity. … A right is clearly established if a reasonable agent would have understood *1061 that what he was doing violated that right. Id.

Ford v. Reynolds

316 F.3d 351 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 17, 2003

The appellees contend that they are entitled to-qualified immunity. … These claims for equitable relief cannot be barred by qualified immunity, so even’ if, on remand, the district court finds that the defendants are each entitled to qualified immunity, it will still need to address the plaintiffs

Arnold B. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EDWARD APFFELS COFFEE COMPANY, Bill Berry and J.C. Hill, Defendants-Appellees

792 F.2d 1482 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 1, 1986

Williams is clearly within a protected group and has suffered an adverse employ *1488 ment decision. … Williams has also clearly suffered a loss of earnings as a result of not being hired for the permanent position.

Dawn Case v. Kitsap County Sheriff's Department

249 F.3d 921 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 9, 2001

In determining whether the deputies are entitled to qualified immunity, we must ask two questions: (1) Was the law governing the officer's conduct clearly established? … Where, as here, the law is clearly established and officers cannot claim to have been reasonable in failing to comply, qualified immunity cannot be granted.

Bradley v. DuPage County Sheriff's Office

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 29, 2021

To determine whether qualified immunity applies, the court asks two questions: (1) whether Kuschell violated a constitutional right; and (2) whether that “right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct … any clearly established right.”

Gray v. Washington State Department of Transportation

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 11, 2023

Plaintiffs must assert that the Individual 9 Defendants violated a clearly established federal right in order to surmount their qualified 10 immunity defense. See Lindsey v. … Shalmy, 29 F.3d 1382, 1384 (9th Cir. 1994) (noting that the 11 doctrine of qualified immunity does not apply to “clearly established federal rights.”) (emphasis 12 added).

Bailey v. Beale

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 12, 2025

Instead, it erroneously insists that Officer Beale must show a lack of clearly established law, and that the district court did not need to resolve the clearly-established-law prong of qualified immunity to deny summary … established, Officer Beale is entitled to qualified immunity on the unlawful entry claim.

Deaullandy Coleman v. Sergeant Jones

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 17, 2022

Nevertheless, the court went on to grant summary judgment to the defendant prison officials on qualified immunity grounds, holding that they had violated no “clearly established” right. … See, e.g., Wall, 741 F.3d at 502 (explaining that right to religious dietary accommodations in prison is “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes); Lovelace v.

Urena v. Shaw

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 10, 2024

the right at issue was clearly established when it was allegedly violated.” … - established step of a court’s] qualified immunity analysis.”

(PC) Shepard v. Borum

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 13, 2021

No. 67 23 at 24). 24 Qualified immunity shields government officials from money damages unless their 25 conduct violated “clearly established statutory … Rowland, 65 F.3d 802, 806 & n.4 (9th Cir. 1995) (“The 20 prohibition against retaliatory punishment [for filing prison grievances] is ‘clearly established 21 law’ in the Ninth Circuit, for qualified immunity purposes.

Blaylock v. City of Philadelphia

504 F.3d 405 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 1, 2007

a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.”) … According ly, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity here “if a reasonable officer could have believed that probable cause existed” to arrest Andre Blaylock “in light of clearly established law and the information

Joseph Siefert v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Comm'rs

951 F.3d 753 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 3, 2020

And, at the very least, Defendants argue, the Sieferts’ due process rights were not clearly established, so qualified immunity blocks this lawsuit. … Even so, could this all be “clearly established” to get around qualified immunity? This standard extends broadly to “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” District of Columbia v.

Blackwell-Esters v. City of Detroit

District Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 14, 2025

conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’” … App’x 437, 447 (6th Cir. 2011) (holding defendants waived arguments as to “clearly established” prong where defendants’ qualified immunity argument was a “one-and-a-half page statement of the law with no attempt

Jensen v. City of Oxnard

145 F.3d 1078 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 28, 1998

Qualified Immunity All of the individual defendants claim that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Government officials are given qualified immunity from civil liability under § 1983 “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

Moncrief v. City of Montgomery (CONSENT)

District Court, M.D. Alabama · Sep 10, 2024

“Qualified immunity ‘shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”’” Odom v. … Because Plaintiffs failed to carry their burden to establish that Finley violated their constitutional rights, Finley is entitled to qualified immunity on Counts II and IV. C.

J.P. v. County of Alameda

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 2, 2020

that the official has violated was clearly established at the time of the violation.” … See Shafer, 868 F.3d at 1117 (holding that qualified immunity applies if no clearly established law exists on the issue); see also White v. Pauly, 137 S.

Harris v. American Medical Intern., Inc.

982 F.2d 528 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 8, 1992

Plaintiff asserts that much of the evidence necessary to establish her claims was in defendants' possession, and emphasizes that discovery was not yet completed when the district court granted summary judgment. 3 Neither … Nevertheless, the latter allegation must first expressly and clearly be made before any claim under § 1981 is even stated.