Case law

Penate v. Kaczmarek

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 7, 2018

A defendant is entitled to the protection of qualified immunity when his “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Kisela v. … Hughes, 138 S.Ct. 1148, 1152 (2018) (holding that qualified immunity protected a police officer in a Fourth Amendment context because the officer’s conduct did not violate clearly established law) (quotations omitted).

Williams v. City & County of Denver

99 F.3d 1009 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 6, 1996

The employee is entitled to qualified immunity either if the law was not clearly established or if his conduct did not violate the law. … To summarize, we affirm the grant of qualified immunity to defendants individually on the ground that the law was not clearly established.

KARA B. v. Dane County

205 Wis. 2d 140 · Wisconsin Supreme Court · Nov 25, 1996

Qualified immunity does not protect public officials who have allegedly violated someone's clearly established constitutional right. Anderson v. … established law' in the qualified immunity determination.

Jones

District Court, E.D. Michigan · Dec 29, 2025

Qualified Immunity Defendants also assert that the claims against Sheriff King must be dismissed under qualified immunity. … Nor is Sheriff King entitled to qualified immunity under the Elrod/Branti defense.

Moody v. Ungerer

18 Brief Times Rptr. 1019 · Supreme Court of Colorado · Jun 13, 1994

In evaluating a police officer’s claim of qualified immunity, a reviewing court must determine whether the right allegedly violated was “clearly established,” i.e., whether the contours of the right were sufficiently clear … Accordingly, we hold that Trooper Moody is entitled to qualified immunity.

Bishop v. Szuba

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 12, 2018

Clearly Established Law An official is entitled to qualified immunity so long as his or her actions don’t “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … (holding that defendant was entitled to qualified immunity because plaintiff “failed to satisfy her burden on the clearly-established-law prong of the qualified-immunity standard”).

Keil v. TRIVELINE

720 F. Supp. 2d 1088 · District Court, W.D. Missouri · Jun 24, 2010

However, subsequent United States Supreme Court cases reveal that limited discovery on the qualified immunity issue is allowed, so long as the plaintiffs allegations state a violation of clearly established law. … In Mitchell, the Court opined, Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery

Davis v. State

902 N.W.2d 165 · Nebraska Supreme Court · Oct 6, 2017

To show a clearly established federal right, the U.S. … clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.140 A court can address the two compo- nents of the qualified immunity analysis in either order.141 139 See Harlow v.

Pueblo of Pojoaque v. New Mexico

214 F. Supp. 3d 1028 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Sep 30, 2016

Qualified Immunity Motion Reply at 9. With respect to the clearly established prong, the Individual Defendants argue that the Plaintiffs still fail to establish a violation of a clearly established right. … Clearly Established Rights in the Qualified Immunity Analysis.

John Dobosz v. Joseph A. Walsh

892 F.2d 1135 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 28, 1989

We believe that with regard to the due process claim relating to the suspension, Walsh did not violate any clearly established law. … Walsh is not entitled to qualified immunity with respect to this claim.

Vickey Horton Tapley v. Darrell Collins

211 F.3d 1210 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 5, 2000

Under this common-law defense, public officials sued in their individual capacities are entitled to qualified immunity when their actions do not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.” … established and deny them qualified immunity when they violate statutory rights that similarly are not clearly established.”

Cody Walton v. Robert Dawson

752 F.3d 1109 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 20, 2014

law relating to qualified immunity.’ ” Lockridge v. … ; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.”

Petsche v. Hruby

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 26, 2025

The Individual Defendants assert qualified immunity on the § 1983 claims and statutory immunity under Chapter 2744 on the state law claim. … was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.”).

Jared Armstrong v. Gerard Asselin

734 F.3d 984 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 1, 2013

Defendants moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … as a whole,” was obscene, and therefore the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity.

Williams v. Kentucky

24 F.3d 1526 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 26, 1994

qualified immunity issues. … Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity on Williams’ First Amendment claim. It was clearly established that the speech Williams cites as the reason for her demotion addressed matters of public concern.

Rouse v. Florio

District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 30, 2019

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … established at the time for qualified immunity purposes).

Ballard v. Cope

District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Feb 1, 2023

Qualified Immunity and Qualified Official Immunity Defendants also argue that Cope is protected from Ballard’s federal claims by qualified immunity and from Ballard’s state law claims by … Kentucky’s qualified official immunity doctrine.

Segaline v. Department of Labor & Industries

199 Wash. App. 748 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 17, 2017

entitled to qualified immunity. … If Alan Croft has qualified immunity as to the trespass notice he is entitled to qualified immunity for the actions that flowed from it. . . . Absent a clearly established right, Mr.

Guerrero Ex Rel. Guerrero v. Alaska Housing Finance Corp.

123 P.3d 966 · Alaska Supreme Court · Nov 4, 2005

They therefore qualify as immune under Alaska’s planning-operational test of discretionary function immunity. 76 We have reached the same conclusion regarding the construction of pedestrian overpasses 77 and other highway … would bar the claim unless the project at issue — here, the A/C traffic couplet — was governed by clearly established standards that mandated their installation.

Bordelon v. Franklin Township, Unpublished Decision (12-13-2001)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 13, 2001

of clearly established law and the information that he possessed. … defendant's conduct did indeed violate clearly established rights).