Case 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.

Miller v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 14, 2025

“The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that ‘government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Both are entitled to qualified immunity. B.

Moulton v. Prosper

District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 11, 2019

To overcome the qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must show that the officer deprived him of a constitutional right that was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged offense. See Saucier v. … To circumvent the Defendant’s entitlement to qualified immunity, the Plaintiff therefore bears the burden of establishing that the officers violated his “clearly established” constitutional right to be free from the

Williams v. Zachary

District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Aug 27, 2021

Thomas, 843 F.3d 172, 177 (5th Cir. 2016) (“Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right.”) (quoting Mace v. … Qualified immunity calls for a bifurcated test in which the court must first determine (1) “whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established

Bass v. Richards

308 F.3d 1081 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 14, 2002

It is subject to appeal, however, when the defendants are public officials asserting a qualified immunity defense and the appealed issue is whether a given set of facts establishes that defendants violated clearly established … Instead, Appellants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because Bass’ right to affiliate himself with Vorhies, an unannounced candidate, was not clearly established at the time his commission was removed.

In re Masterson

503 S.W.3d 412 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 15, 2016

(explaining that “ ‘an issue of first impression can sometimes qualify for mandamus relief when the factual scenario has never been, precisely addressed but the principle of law has been clearly established’ ”) (quoting In … Weeks, 391 S.W.3d 117, 122 (Tex.Crim.App.2013)), ■ To establish the second of the two requirements for obtaining a writ of prohibition, a relator must demonstrate the absence of an adequate remedy at law.

Lewis Floyd, Jr., vs Duane Corder

426 F. App'x 790 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 13, 2011

To defeat qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show that “(1) the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) this right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” Id. … immunity because his actions did not violate Floyd’s “clearly established rights.”

(PC) Dawson v. Lynch

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 19, 2022

It is unclear from the allegations 19 that plaintiff qualifies for a medical order for single-cell status and, regardless, the complaint 20 establishes that custody staff has determined that plaintiff qualifies for single-cell … Robinson, 817 F.3d 1162, 1169 (9th Cir. 2016) (statutory 27 language permits sua sponte, pre-service dismissal on grounds of qualified immunity as well as 28 absolute immunity).

Sommer Richards v. Lvmpd

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 14, 2023

immunity is raised, plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that alleged right was clearly established). … Because Richards has not established that the alleged right in this case was clearly established at the time of her encounter with Wills, Wills is entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity.2 2

Sockwell v. Town of Calhoun City

District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Aug 5, 2019

Thomas, 843 F.3d 172, 177 (5th Cir. 2016) (“Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right.) (quoting Mace v. … Qualified immunity calls for a bifurcated test in which the court must first determine (1) “whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established statutory or constitutional right and, if so, (2) whether

Birbiglia v. Saint Vincent Hospital, Inc.

427 Mass. 80 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 16, 1998

Geltman, 406 Mass. 811, 816-817 [1990]) would not be thereby shown to have failed to qualify for immunity. … The specific intent that would be required to establish that the action of the board violated any duty of good faith and fair dealing cannot be established by aggregating the knowledge of all hospital employees acting within

Lee v. Mihalich

847 F.2d 66 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 17, 1988

In furtherance of these policies, the discriminant for qualified immunity focuses on the objective legal reasonableness of an official’s acts under law which has been clearly established at the time he acts. … A government official will be denied qualified immunity for having violated a clearly established right when “in the light of preexisting law the unlawfulness [is] apparent.” Anderson, 107 S.Ct. at 3039 .

Eugene F. Assaf v. George C. Fields Gary E. Crowell

178 F.3d 170 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 19, 1999

Nonetheless, it held that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that Assaf could not be fired for political reasons. See id. at 633. III. … to qualified immunity.

City of Saint Albans v. Botkins

228 W. Va. 393 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 23, 2011

As to the second step of the qualified immunity inquiry— whether the constitutional standards were clearly established at the time in question— the Ninth Circuit concluded it should be answered by applying the same test the … Is there qualified immunity?

Suasnavas v. Stover

196 F. App'x 647 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 25, 2006

court’s denial of qualified immunity. … “[W]here the right is clearly established, a defendant should only rarely be able to succeed with a qualified immunity defense.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). Gomes, 451 F.3d at 1134-35. D.

Doe v. Oregon State University

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 13, 2022

Additionally, the Court is unaware of any case indicating a district court opinion alone, without at least some appellate court precedent, qualifies as clearly established precedent in the qualified immunity context. … Because Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate a clearly established property interest in his continued enrollment at OSU, the individual Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Allaedhin Qandah v. Michael McKee

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 8, 2022

Koehler, 616 F.3d 855, 861 (8th Cir. 2010) (limiting appellate review of denial of qualified immunity to determining whether conduct, as factually supported under summary judgment standard, violated a plaintiff’s clearly … established rights).

Connelly v. Hall

District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 15, 2025

Once qualified immunity is raised by a defendant, and it is established that the government official was acting within his/her discretionary authority, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that qualified immunity … Therefore, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity and the Court need not address whether the law was clearly established. IV.

Davis v. City of Covington

District Court, E.D. Kentucky · May 13, 2024

Under federal law, “[t]he doctrine of qualified immunity insulates public officials from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless the caselaw existing at the time of their actions clearly established that they violated the … And as a matter of law, Lusardi is entitled to qualified immunity regarding this use of force because Davis has again failed to carry his burden of demonstrating that Lusardi’s conduct was clearly established as having

Arthur Clark Melissa Clark v. Earl Link R.E. Combs, and Charles Britt Fredrickia Britt Frank Stanley

855 F.2d 156 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 16, 1988

Since the issue in this appeal is the validity of the deputies’ plea of qualified immunity, we consider first the principles governing qualified immunity. We take it as clearly established that under Malley v. … by showing that those rights were clearly established at the time of the conduct at issue.