Case law

Ortiz v. Mora

District Court, D. New Mexico · Dec 10, 2019

However, Mora violated no clearly established law and therefore is entitled to qualified immunity. The Court also holds that Plaintiff’s Fed. R. Civ. … “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.

Tate v. United States

72 F. App'x 265 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 8, 2003

The putative next friend must clearly establish “the propriety of his status” in order to “justify the jurisdiction of the court.” Whitmore, 495 U.S. at 164 . … Cockrell and Young did not satisfy the requirements to qualify for next Mend status.

Phillips v. Pike

District Court, W.D. Missouri · Sep 7, 2021

Qualified Immunity Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity in a § 1983 claim unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right … Deputy Childers is entitled to qualified immunity on this initial entry and seizure claim because his conduct was objectively reasonable and did not violate clearly established law.

Gould v. Davis

165 F.3d 265 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 31, 1998

We agree with the district court that the officers are not entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutional right at issue was clearly established at the time of the events in question and was a right of which a … The second prong of the qualified immunity analysis inquires whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time the alleged violation took place.

Johnson v. Wilfong

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Aug 19, 2025

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person [in their positions … State Univ., 495 F.3d 591, 594 (8th Cir. 2007) (“Although the defendant bears the burden of proof for this affirmative defense [of qualified immunity], the plaintiff must demonstrate that the law was clearly established

Kohl v. Casson

5 F.3d 1141 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 28, 1993

Briggs, 475 U.S. 335, 342 , 106 S.Ct. 1092, 1097 , 89 L.Ed.2d 271 (1986), the Court held that the function of seeking an arrest warrant is subject only to qualified immunity, not absolute immunity. … and enjoys only qualified immunity, just as the police officer was held to have in Malley .

Turkmen v. Ashcroft

915 F. Supp. 2d 314 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 15, 2013

Qualified Immunity The allegations against the MDC defendants state a violation of clearly established Fourth Amendment law. … Qualified Immunity Defendants also suggest that they are entitled to qualified immunity because in 2001 it was not clearly established that Section 1985 applied to federal officials.

Vaseleros-Stevenson v. Calvert County, Maryland

District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 17, 2021

Plaintiff frequently viisconstrues the “clearly established” prong of the analysis. … He is clearly entitled to qualified immunity. Plaintiffs § 1983 claim asserted against him is therefore DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. B.

Mark Crawford v. Donavin Geiger

656 F. App'x 190 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 11, 2016

Legal Standards: Qualified Immunity and the Fourth Amendment “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … immunity analysis, “[t]he dispositive question is whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.”

Oxley v. Contra Costa County Sheriff Department

District Court, N.D. California · Jan 31, 2025

Hughes, 584 U.S. 100, 105 16 (2018) (finding officer entitled to qualified immunity against an excessive force claim 17 because there was no clearly established law by which any competent officer would have 18 known … Defendants assert that 17 Defendant Jones is entitled to qualified immunity based on the undisputed facts and the 18 absence of any controlling authority clearly establishing that his conduct was unlawful. 19 Id

White v. Stone

District Court, D. New Mexico · Sep 13, 2022

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

Bissell v. Mata

District Court, W.D. Texas · Jun 16, 2025

The Fifth Circuit held that the child protective workers were entitled to qualified immunity because the right to family integrity was not clearly established under those facts. … entitled to qualified immunity.

United States v. Abdalla

327 F. Supp. 3d 1079 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Aug 29, 2018

Greene , 250 F.3d 471 , 480 (6th Cir. 2001) ("Circuit precedent clearly establishes that *1087 the affiant need only specify that the confidential informant has given accurate information in the past to qualify as reliable … While the address above the judge's signature was wrong, that was clearly the result of Agent Brandon Gooch cutting and pasting from an earlier warrant.

Torchinsky v. Siwinski

942 F.2d 257 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 9, 1991

A. 12 The basic purposes of qualified immunity bear repeating. … This objective test involves an inquiry into whether a government official has violated "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v.

Thunderhawk v. Morton, County of, North Dakota

District Court, D. North Dakota · Nov 6, 2023

established prong of qualified immunity under the circumstances of this case. … Plaintiffs have failed to provide a factually similar case sufficient to support the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity analysis.

Oladeinde v. Birmingham, City of

230 F.3d 1275 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 16, 2000

Applicability of Qualified Immunity for First Amendment Claims Chief Deutsch and Captain Walker contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate clearly established law. … "Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity 'insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Lipkin

District Court, D. Connecticut · Mar 31, 2026

“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.” City of Escondido v. … Moreover, in the First Amendment context, the Second Circuit has recognized that qualified immunity is not available where (1) “specific intent of a defendant is an element of plaintiff’s claim under clearly established

Fogarty v. Gallegos

523 F.3d 1147 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 18, 2008

On appeal, defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on both counts because Fogarty’s evidence falls short of establishing a deprivation of a clearly established constitutional right. … they violated was clearly established.

Whitaker v. Wisconsin Department of Health Services

849 F.3d 681 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 27, 2017

We agree with the district court that Whita- ker failed to establish that she was an “otherwise qualified” employee, as required by the Rehabilitation Act, and we af- firm the grant of summary judgment. I. … Since Whitaker failed to establish that she was an “other- wise qualified” employee, we need not address whether she properly requested an accommodation, or whether her ac- commodation request was reasonable.

Bunting v. Mellen

541 U.S. 1019 · Supreme Court of the United States · Apr 26, 2004

immunity. … The Court of Appeals concluded that Bunting is entitled to qualified immunity, id., at 376, and respondents have not challenged that ruling.