Case law

Wayne Ford v. John McGinnis Superintendent, Patrick McGann Deputy Superintendent of Administration, Gordon Lord, Assistant Deputy Superintendent

352 F.3d 582 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 15, 2003

We agree with the district court’s discussion of qualified immunity insofar as it found that the constitutional right at issue is clearly established. Ford, 230 F.Supp.2d at 348 . … claimed right is clearly established. 17 .

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.

NEWBERG v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 2, 2025

Qualified Immunity Does Not Preclude Liability Because Plaintiff’s Rights Were Well-Established: The application of qualified immunity is inapplicable because … Qualified immunity does not preclude liability if the “official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.” Id. at 232.

Patric Patterson v. Kennie Bolden

902 F.3d 845 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 5, 2018

Qualified immunity shields state officials from both civil liability and the burdens of litigation unless their conduct violates a clearly established right of which a reasonable person would have known. Young v. … The district court did not err in granting the defendants qualified immunity. IV.

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).

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

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

Young v. Suffolk County

922 F. Supp. 2d 368 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 11, 2013

Young lacked apparent authority to consent to Delgado’s entry, Delgado is shielded from Section 1983 liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity. … City of Hobbs, 90 F.Supp.2d 1313, 1320 (D.N.M.2000) (police had qualified immunity on claim that caretaker had apparent authority to authorize search of common areas of the house). .

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.

Guy v. Wyo. Dep't of Corr.

444 P.3d 652 · Wyoming Supreme Court · Jul 9, 2019

Thus, we will address the Defendants' argument that they are entitled to qualified immunity. *659 [¶19] "Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability if their conduct does not violate clearly established … To overcome qualified immunity, the alleged right at issue must be "clearly established," such that it is "beyond debate." See, e.g. , Dist. of Columbia 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.

Dorothy King v. Virginia Betts

354 S.W.3d 691 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Nov 18, 2011

medications violated a clearly established right. … an otherwise clearly established law). .

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

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

Grimes v. Fitts <b><font color="red"> AS OF 10/19/22, FILINGS FROM SHALL BE SCREENED BEFORE BEING DOCKETED [74]</font></b>

District Court, S.D. Texas · May 21, 2024

Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting qualified immunity and arguing that Plaintiff cannot establish a genuine dispute of material fact as to his claims (see Dkt. No. 116 at 1, 3, 16–18). … The Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to the warden at summary judgment. Id. at [*13– 14].

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

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

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[?]”

Baldridge v. Cordes

350 Ark. 114 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 26, 2002

Qualified Immunity A motion for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity is precluded only when the plaintiff has asserted a constitutional violation, demonstrated the constitutional right is clearly established and … Thus, an official is immune from suit if his actions did not violate clearly established principles of law of which a reasonable person would have knowledge. Virden v.

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