Case law

S.M. v. Michael Krigbaum

808 F.3d 335 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 9, 2015

Qualified immunity shields a public official from damage liability unless the official’s actions violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … violation was clearly established at the time in question, what was known to a person who might be shielded by qualified immunity, and the reasonableness of defendant’s actions.

Brent Jacoby v. Baldwin County

835 F.3d 1338 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2016

“In this [C]ircuit, the law can be ‘clearly established’ for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S. … And Magluta looked to Hewitt to determine whether the liberty interest was clearly established for the purposes of the defendants’ qualified-immunity claim. See id. at 1283–84.

Rivera v. Redfern

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 21, 2023

Thus, the court may forego difficult constitutional issues and award qualified immunity to a defendant if it is apparent that the defendant did not violate rights that were clearly established at the time the defendant … “If neither source provides relevant caselaw, we consider whether ‘a robust consensus of cases of persuasive authority in the Court of Appeals could clearly establish a right for purposes of qualified immunity.’ Id.

Tidwell v. Gomez

District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 1, 2021

Serpas, 745 F.3d 767, 771 (Sth Cir. 2014) (“Once the defendant raises the qualified immunity defense, ‘the burden shifts to the plaintiff to rebut this defense by establishing that the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct … violated clearly established law.’”

Johnson v. Rowe

District Court, D. Connecticut · Jun 27, 2025

Defendants bear of the burden of establishing qualified immunity. Outlaw v. … The defendants have not met their burden of establishing qualified immunity at the pleadings stage.

City of Fayetteville v. Romine

373 Ark. 318 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 1, 2008

violation, demonstrated the constitutional right is clearly established, and raised a genuine issue of fact as to whether the official would have known that the conduct violated that clearly established right. … his conduct violated that clearly established right.

Doe v. Marsh

105 F.3d 106 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 22, 1997

"Even where the plaintiff's federal rights and the scope of the official's permissible conduct are clearly established, the qualified immunity defense protects a government actor if it was 'objectively reasonable' for him … 'clearly established' at the time [the action] was taken.")

Michael Smith v. Yates

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 13, 2019

See Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731, 735 (2011) (explaining two-part test for qualified immunity); Hines v. … Youseff, 914 F.3d 1218, 1229-30 (9th Cir. 2019) (existing Valley Fever cases did not clearly establish a “right to be free from heightened exposure to Valley Fever spores”).

Estep v. Combs

District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Jun 17, 2020

This would cloak Combs in qualified immunity. See Phillips, 786 F. … See, e.g., DE 55-1 at 16–18, 21–22.21 However, the Sixth Circuit has explicitly held that “freedom from excessively forceful or unduly tight handcuffing is a clearly established right for purposes of qualified immunity

Generis Ent., LLC v. Mary Anne Donley

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 19, 2026

Trooper Bitner moved to dismiss Generis’ complaint, arguing, in relevant part, that qualified immunity shielded him from suit because the liquor inspection search was not pretextual and no clearly established law placed … The district denied Trooper Bitner’s demand for qualified immunity, 3 finding that Generis had plausibly alleged a pretextual use of inspection authority for criminal investigation and that this violated clearly established

MORAN v. HAWTHORNE POLICE DEPARTMENT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 18, 2025

The Officer Defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity. However, those arguments presently “rest on what are currently contested factual averments.” Velardo v. … City of Elizabeth, 436 F. 3d 397, 405 (3d Cir. 2006) (“Although qualified immunity is a question of law determined by the Court, when qualified immunity depends on disputed issues of fact, those issues must be determined

Smith v. BRT

363 Ark. 126 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 30, 2005

Under that analysis, 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, … qualified immunity under Ark.

Sullivan v. Coney

427 S.W.3d 682 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 23, 2013

right is clearly established, and (3) raised a genuine issue of fact as to whether the official would have known that the conduct violated that clearly established right. … that his conduct violated that clearly established right.

Reynolds-Marshall v. Hallum

162 B.R. 51 · District Court, D. Maine · Dec 29, 1993

That rule provides that “[findings of fact ... shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous.” B.R. 8013. This Court will review determinations of law de novo. A. … In Davenport , the Supreme Court indicated that the legislative history of the Bankruptcy Code “reflects Congress’ broad rather than restrictive view of the class of obligations that qualify as a ‘claim’ giving rise to a

Wilcox v. Batiste

360 F. Supp. 3d 1112 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Dec 21, 2018

Qualified Immunity The parties also dispute whether Chief Batiste is entitled to qualified immunity from monetary damages. 3 ECF No. 35 at 9; ECF No. 56 at 14. … The Court begins by assessing whether the right that Chief Batiste is alleged to have violated is clearly established. *1124 A right from a federal statute or the constitution is clearly established when a reasonable official

Joseph Walton, as Next Friend of Christopher Walton, a Minor v. Alma Alexander, Alma Alexander

20 F.3d 1350 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 1, 1994

State officials are protected by qualified immunity for alleged constitutional torts if their conduct does not violate clearly established law effective at the time of the alleged tort. Harlow v. … Therefore, the first step in examining a defendant’s claim of qualified immunity is to determine whether the plaintiff has “al-leg[ed] the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.” Siegert v.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. CHRISTOPHER KIM (16-07-0591 AND 17-02-0115, PASSAIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 21, 2018

at 123 (analyzing the exemption in the context of a claim of qualified immunity). … at 343 (holding "it is only when the facts known to the prosecutor clearly indicate or clearly establish the appropriateness of an instruction that the duty of the prosecution arises"); cf. State v.

Jerry Reed v. Allison Taylor

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 2, 2019

The district court granted summary judgment to the officials based on qualified immunity, holding that the threat of criminal prosecution wasn’t “other legal process” under clearly established law. Reed appealed. … “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’

Boyle Ventures, LLC v. City of Fayetteville

711 S.W.3d 280 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 15, 2025

“A motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity is precluded only when the plaintiff has asserted a constitutional violation, demonstrated the constitutional right is clearly established and raised a genuine … 21  would have known that the conduct violated that clearly established right.

Melvin Alan Wood v. Michael Kesler, individually and in his capacity as an Alabama State Trooper, Brian Jones

323 F.3d 872 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 4, 2003

General Principles “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … “If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.” Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201.