Case law

Gatlin

District Court, E.D. Missouri · Oct 15, 2025

“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 a reasonable … was ‘clearly established.’”

Salgado v. Smith

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 8, 2025

The district court granted summary judgment for Smith based on qualified immunity, finding no constitutional violation and no violation of clearly established law. Salgado appeals. We affirm. … We find it appropriate in this case to proceed directly to the second prong of qualified immunity—whether the right was clearly established. We hold that Smith did not violate Molina’s clearly established rights.

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.

Waldron v. Roark

902 N.W.2d 204 · Nebraska Supreme Court · Oct 13, 2017

Immunity. In a qualified immunity analysis, the dispositive question is whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established. … Hillan, The Not-So-Clearly Established Qualified Immunity Doctrine, The Nebraska Lawyer, March/April 2017, at 15 (discussing history and details of qualified immunity doctrine).  2 Waldron v.

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.

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.”

Harris v. Mahr

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 4, 2020

We conclude that the law was not “clearly established” at the time of the incident and reverse the district court’s denial of qualified immunity. … Therefore, the denial of qualified immunity was error.

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.

(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.

Carter v. United States

684 A.2d 331 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 24, 1996

to the crucial defense witness involved who is shown to be the only witness who, if believed, would clearly establish a reasonable doubt on the defendant’s guilt. … If immunity of the crucial defense witness is then sought, the defendant must first establish to the trial court’s satisfaction that the proposed testimony is (a) material, (b) clearly exculpatory, (c) non-cumulative, and

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.

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.

John Betts v. Martha Anne Shearman

751 F.3d 78 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 2, 2014

Even  in  the  absence  of  probable  cause,  a  police  officer  is  entitled  to  qualified  immunity  where  “(1)  [her]  conduct  does  not  violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which  … For  the  following reasons, we agree with the district court that the arresting  officers  had  arguable  probable  cause  and  were  entitled  to  qualified  immunity.   10 13

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

BUCEK v. ALLEGHENY COUNTY

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 18, 2023

The individual County Defendants separately raise qualified immunity defenses. … Lapina, 258 F.3d 156, 161 (3d Cir. 2001) (“Qualified immunity will be upheld on a 12(b)(6) motion only when the immunity is established on the face of the complaint.”). II.

Edwards v. DeBord

District Court, W.D. Virginia · Aug 12, 2019

immunity. … Harris, 65 F.3d 347, 359 (4th Cir. 1995) (holding that when resolution of qualified immunity question and case itself both depend upon a determination of what actually happened, summary judgment on grounds of qualified

TALLEY v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 2024

be entitled to qualified immunity because the Amended Complaint has failed to clearly identify how the clerk violated Plaintiff’s constitutional or statutory rights. See Mirabella v. … right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”); Williams v.

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).

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.”

Robbie Autery v. Kevin Davis

355 F. App'x 253 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 12, 2009

Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity so long as their discretionary actions do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. Lewis v. … Even in the absence of Terry, Sheriff Davis would still be entitled to qualified immunity. In Foy v.