Case law

Eugene A. Johnson v. Estate of Mark A. Laccheo, and James Overstreet, City of Eastlake

935 F.2d 109 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 5, 1991

Therefore, before granting defendants qualified immunity, we must decide: 1) whether Johnson has identified a clearly established right alleged to have been violated; and, 2) whether a reasonable police officer in either … To summarize, defendants are entitled to a qualified immunity defense because they did not violate a clearly established law when arresting Johnson; and, even if such law were violated, a reasonable police officer in like

Gloria Taylor v. City of Milford

10 F.4th 800 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 19, 2021

Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … When assessing a defendant’s assertion of qualified immunity, we ask: “whether the plain‐ tiff’s allegations make out a deprivation of a constitutional right, and whether the right was clearly established at the time of defendant

Amy Corbitt v. Michael Vickers

929 F.3d 1304 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 10, 2019

Because we find no violation of a clearly established right, we need not reach the other qualified immunity question of whether a constitutional violation occurred in the first place. … While it is true that "only binding precedent can clearly establish a right for qualified immunity purposes," Gilmore v.

Tabatha Manning v. Vaughn Cotton

862 F.3d 663 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 5, 2017

Qualified Immunity Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are generally immune from civil liability so long as "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … To determine whether Officer Cotton is entitled to qualified immunity, we must ask whether his actions violated a constitutional right and whether that right was clearly established. See Borgman, 646 F.3d at 522.

Hunt v. Massi

773 F.3d 361 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Dec 10, 2014

The district court denied the police officers' claim of qualified immunity on summary judgment based, in part, on the court's erroneous conception of the clearly established law. Hunt v. Massi, 5 F. … Nevertheless, the district court held that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity since no precedent clearly established the plaintiff's right "not to be handcuffed behind his back after he allegedly informed [

Buckner v. Kilgore

36 F.3d 536 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 3, 1994

Government officials performing discretionary functions have qualified immunity shielding them from civil liability if their actions did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … In analyzing a claim of qualified immunity, a court must determine whether the defendant’s alleged conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.

Kristee Boyle v. Joseph Azzari, Jr.

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 9, 2024

“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields [law enforcement] officers from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … USCA4 Appeal: 23-1107 Doc: 36 Filed: 07/09/2024 Pg: 13 of 22 “That means that we may grant qualified immunity on the ground that the purported right was not clearly established without

Whalen v. Fulton County

19 F.3d 828 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 29, 1994

In reviewing the qualified immunity motion, the court did not address whether the state of the law was such that Michael had a clearly established right to a relationship with Elizabeth. … ("Unless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery. ") (emphasis added).

Zachary Rosenbaum v. City of San Jose

107 F.4th 919 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 11, 2024

CITY OF SAN JOSE SUMMARY * Excessive Force/Qualified Immunity/Police Dogs The panel affirmed the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to City of San Jose police officers in … Accordingly, we affirm the denial of qualified immunity. I.

Torres v. Madrid

60 F.4th 596 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 17, 2023

Torres’s claims were barred by the doctrine of qualified immunity because, at the time she was shot, the law was not clearly established that the Fourth Amendment protects persons who successfully elude seizure. … Torres’s escape to establish qualified immunity. C. Qualified Immunity—Reasonableness of Force and Clearly Established Law There remains to be decided the merits of Ms.

Lewis v. City of West Palm Beach, Fla.

561 F.3d 1288 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 11, 2009

Thus, if the violated right was not clearly established, qualified immunity still applies. Id. at 201. … A right may be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes in one of three ways: (1) case law with indistinguishable facts clearly establishing the constitutional right, Long v.

Rosenbaum v. Washoe County

654 F.3d 1001 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 30, 2011

, whether that right was clearly established at the time of the event. … of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.”

Brisk v. City of Miami Beach, Fla.

726 F. Supp. 1305 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 15, 1989

For instance, if the plaintiff’s allegations do not state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery. … of violations of clearly established law. 13 Accordingly, the case proceeded to *1309 trial with the qualified immunity issue unaddressed and hence unresolved.

Lovelace v. Delo

47 F.3d 286 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 8, 1995

However, if the plaintiffs’ allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law and the parties disagree as to what actions the law enforcement officers took, discovery may be appropriate for the limited purpose … of addressing the issue of qualified immunity.

Bonnie Lutz v. Weld County School District No. 6, William A. Mitchell, James B. Elliott, Winifred Gettman

784 F.2d 340 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 10, 1986

Where the affirmative defense of qualified immunity is properly raised, it is *343 the plaintiffs burden to convince the court that the law is clearly established: A plaintiff who seeks damages for violation of constitutional … or statutory rights may overcome the defendant official’s qualified immunity only by showing that those rights were clearly established at the time of the conduct at issue.

McInerney v. King

791 F.3d 1224 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 30, 2015

he violated her clearly established constitutional rights. … McInerney has not shown he violated a clearly established constitutional right. 7 “Qualified immunity protects ‘government officials performing discretionary functions’ and shields them from ‘liability for civil

Dominick Perniciaro, III v. Hampton Lea

901 F.3d 241 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 16, 2018

Nicholl’s conduct was objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law. He is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. … Perniciaro has failed to establish that Dr. Thompson violated his clearly established rights, and Dr. Thompson is therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

Sylvia Daniel v. Earl Taylor, Keith Dunkel, Bernadette Hernandez, Fred Woodward, Ernest Dorling and Tommy Pritchard

808 F.2d 1401 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 23, 1986

immunity because they did not violate a clearly established constitutional right of the plaintiff. … The unsettled character of this legal question is evident and demonstrates that no “clearly established” fourth amendment 3 right of plaintiff was violated. Therefore, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Michael W. Alvarado v. Ronald D. Picur, Special Administrator of the Estate of Robert Curry, 1

859 F.2d 448 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 27, 1988

We reverse because Curry had qualified immunity. … Thus whether Curry is protected by qualified immunity turns on the objective reasonableness of his actions in those thirty minutes, as assessed in light of the legal rules that were “clearly established” on November 22, 1985

Nolen v. Jackson

102 F.3d 1187 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 6, 1997

to allege a violation of a clearly established right.... … Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 231 , 111 S.Ct. 1789, 1793 , 114 L.Ed.2d 277 (1991) (holding threshold question in a qualified immunity claim is whether a violation of a clearly established constitutional right has occurred); Lassiter