Case law

Tate Smith v. Odessa Junior College District, et a

507 F. App'x 359 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 10, 2013

As stated, for our analysis of the second prong of the qualified-immunity test, the objective reasonableness of Davis’ actions must be viewed in the light of then clearly-established law. … Needless to say, the law was not clearly established.

In Re Sloan Estate

212 Mich. App. 357 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 1995

"Fees for fees” claims are brought in behalf of the attorney seeking the fees and clearly do not benefit the estate because they do not increase or preserve the estate’s assets. … On the other hand, at least one jurisdiction has permitted such claims, adopting the policy argument that precluding "fees for fees” claims may have a deleterious effect on the ability of an estate to retain qualified and

(PC) Gordon v. Cooper

District Court, E.D. California · May 1, 2025

Spencer, 336 F.3d 832, 835 (9th Cir. 2003), did not clearly establish a constitutional 1 right to privacy in juvenile records); A.C. v. Cortez, 398 F. Supp. 3d 748, 752 (S.D. … App’x 811, 812 (9th Cir. 2013) (holding social workers entitled to qualified 4 immunity because there was no clearly established constitutional “right to privacy” for juvenile 5 records even when disclosed to third parties

Mattson v. Streibel

District Court, D. Idaho · Dec 20, 2023

violated clearly established law at the time of the incident. … Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability unless a plaintiff proves: “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time

Curtis v. Christian County, Kentucky

District Court, W.D. Kentucky · May 24, 2022

However, even if a constitutional violation did occur, the second factor— whether that right was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged misconduct—still entitles Defendants to qualified immunity. … Sheriff’s Off., 695 F.3d 505 (6th Cir. 2012) (explaining the “clearly established” right requirement of qualified immunity particularly in relation to the use of a taser).

Markland v. Carter Co Sheriff Dept Swat Team Members

District Court, E.D. Tennessee · Aug 25, 2025

Clearly Established Right Even if Defendants violated Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights, they are entitled to summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. … To refute Defendants’ qualified immunity defense, Plaintiff bore the burden of demonstrating that the claimed right was clearly established. Ciminillo, 434 F.3d at 466; see also Mosier v.

Bunty Ngaeth v. Mukasey

545 F.3d 796 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 24, 2008

He argues that the BIA erred in holding that his burglary conviction could be classified as an attempted theft offense, qualifying him as an aggravated felon under the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”). … The two circuits that have addressed this issue have both concluded, or suggested, that a vehicular burglary can qualify as an attempted theft offense under the INA. See United States v.

RADIATION DATA, INC. VS. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (L-1260-16, SOMERSET COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

456 N.J. Super. 550 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 2, 2018

Most pertinent to the present appeal, defendants invoked principles of qualified immunity and argued that RDI's constitutional and NJCRA claims must be dismissed because defendants violated no "clearly established" laws … Therefore, "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."

Baxter v. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

165 Wis. 2d 298 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · Oct 24, 1991

The meaning of "reasonable accommodation" was not clearly established. 6 "[T]he right the official is alleged to have violated must have been 'clearly established' in a more particularized, and hence more relevant, sense: … That term and the regulations surrounding it cannot fairly be read as clearly establishing any such rights. 8 *310 However, because the basic requirement of "reasonable accommodation" was clearly established by 1985, if the

W. Va. Board of Education and L. Wade Linger, Jr. v. Jorea M. Marple

236 W. Va. 654 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 10, 2015

Marple has not identified a clearly established right that was violated by the discretionary actions of the Board or Mr. Linger, her suit is precluded by qualified immunity. A. … the constitutional standards clearly established at the time[?]”

McDonald v. City of Troy

District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 3, 2021

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … Luna, 577 U.S. 7, 12-14 (2015) (reversing denial of qualified immunity because circuit court considered it clearly established that police officer may not “use deadly force against a fleeing felon who d[id] not pose

Burns v. Rekeweg

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 2, 2020

Defendants further contend that Deputy Mendoza is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate Burn’s clearly-established rights. … Therefore, Mendoza is entitled to summary judgment based upon the clearly-established prong of the qualified immunity analysis.

John Ronald Bertram v. George Deukmejian

9 F.3d 1550 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 4, 1993

for qualified immunity purposes. … Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 193-94 (1984) (state official retains qualified immunity if the federal constitutional right was not clearly established, even if the conduct clearly violated state statute or regulation). 5 In Turner

People v. Bylsma

493 Mich. 17 · Michigan Supreme Court · Dec 19, 2012

However, a defendant need not establish the elements of § 4 immunity in order establish the elements of a § 8 defense. 1. … Rather, in People v Kolanek, we held that a defendant need not establish the elements of § 4 immunity in order to establish the elements of the § 8 defense.4 Accordingly, we reverse the Court of Appeals’ judgment to the

Hong v. Grant

403 F. App'x 236 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 12, 2010

Hong has sued in their individual capacities are entitled to qualified immunity. … It is far from clearly established today, much less in 2004 when the university officers voted on Hong’s merits increase, that university professors have a First Amendment right to comment on faculty administrative matters

Brikho v. Detroit, City of

District Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 31, 2021

Under the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity test, the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear such that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right. … Even if Defendants are found to have used excessive force while executing the search warrant, they are still entitled to qualified immunity unless such conduct violated a clearly established right.

Suri

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 14, 2026

When it comes to qualified immunity, “[a] prison official is immune from suit if the constitutional right at issue was not clearly established at the time of the violation, and thus a reasonable officer would not have known … The right to be protected from inmate-on-inmate violence was clearly established at the time of the complained-of events and has been clearly established for decades. See, e.g., Mayoral v.

Pagan v. Fruchey

492 F.3d 766 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 29, 2007

A judicial pronouncement that an ordinance is consistent with common sense hardly establishes that it is so. B. … The district court, in its order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants, determined that Chief Fruchey was entitled to qualified immunity.

Juanita CAUSEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY Et Al., Defendants-Appellees

516 F.2d 416 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 24, 1975

Rule 52(a), F.R.Civ.P., lays down the “clearly erroneous” test for appellate review of district court findings of fact. … In sum, the court concluded that appellant had failed to establish unlawful discrimination by the requisite evidentiary preponderance.

Guider v. Smith

431 Mich. 559 · Michigan Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1988

clearly established at the time in question. … If the undisputed facts show that the defendant’s conduct violated no clearly established constitutional standards, qualified immunity applies as a matter of law.