Case law

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.

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.

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.

Vojvodich v. Lopez

48 F.3d 879 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 30, 1995

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.24 … The second step in the qualified immunity analysis is determining whether the constitutional rights allegedly violated were clearly established at the time the events occurred.

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.

City of Hialeah v. Fernandez

661 So. 2d 335 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 27, 1995

[FN3] Once the qualified immunity defense is raised, plaintiffs bear the burden of showing that the federal "rights" allegedly violated were "clearly established." … [The officer] is entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that the amount of force used outside the restaurant was unlawful. Post, 7 F.3d at 1559-60 (citations omitted).

Artis v. Cyphers

100 Md. App. 633 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 8, 1994

The Mitchell Court continued, at 526, 105 S.Ct. at 2815 : “Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified im *650 munity is entitled to dismissal before … judgment for the defendant on the ground that even under the defendant’s version of the facts the defendant’s conduct violated clearly established law, whether the law clearly proscribed the actions the defendant claims

Heather Hinterberger v. Iroquios School District

548 F. App'x 50 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 5, 2013

“District court opinions may be relevant to the determination of when a right was clearly established for qualified immunity analysis.” Doe v. Delie, 257 F.3d 309, 321 (3d Cir. 2001). … As Hinterberger’s alleged right was not clearly established at the time of her injury, Loftus is entitled to qualified immunity from suit. III.

Robin Kirkland Neal v. Daniel Ficcadenti

895 F.3d 576 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 12, 2018

We have jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal of a denial of qualified immunity because the issue of a violation of a clearly established constitutional right is a question of law. See Jackson v. … Clearly Established Right We turn now to the question of whether or not the constitutional right that Officer Ficcadenti allegedly violated was clearly established as of June 6, 2012.

Virden v. Roper

302 Ark. 125 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 23, 1990

The appealability of a denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity from suit is clearly established. Robinson v. Beaumont, supra; Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985); and see Cohen v. … They maintain in the alternative if a violation of a constitutional right occurred, it is not a “clearly established” right and, hence, appellants are entitled to qualified immunity under Mitchell, supra.

Nikos Kidis v. Jean Reid

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 25, 2020

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982) (holding that government officials are generally entitled to immunity from civil damages as long as they did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights”); see … ] from raising the qualified immunity defense on appeal from a final judgment.”).

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.

Bruce Joiner v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 27, 2020

Pena, 518 U.S. 187, 195 (1996) (noting the “established practice of construing waivers of sovereign immunity narrowly in favor of the sovereign”). … These recitations are insufficient to establish that further discovery will overcome the discretionary function exception and defeat sovereign immunity.

Sherrod v. SCHOOL BD. OF PALM BEACH COUNTY

703 F. Supp. 2d 1279 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 18, 2010

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity operates to ensure that “before they are subjected to suit, [public] officers are on notice their conduct is unlawful.” Hope v. … Thus, qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages unless their actions violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Lavigne v. Forshee

307 Mich. App. 530 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 28, 2014

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Thus, in the case of a police officer, qualified immunity will not apply if the officer transgresses a right that was “clearly established,” when “‘it would be clear to a reasonable officer that [her] conduct was unlawful

Mumm v. Mornson

708 N.W.2d 475 · Supreme Court of Minnesota · Jan 10, 2006

rights was not clearly established. … To avoid application of qualified immunity, the law regarding Mornson’s right to be free from the unreasonable use of force must have been clearly established at the time of the pursuit.

Hamrick v. State

426 S.C. 638 · Supreme Court of South Carolina · May 15, 2019

Accident reconstruction requires expertise,6 and from the outset, the State sought to establish Officer Harris's qualifications as an expert in accident reconstruction. … Second, the trial court failed to make the necessary findings that the State established the foundation required by Rule 702. See Council, 335 S.C. at 20, 515 S.E.2d at 518.

Benjamin v. Washington State Bar Ass'n

980 P.2d 742 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 22, 1999

No qualified immunity for violation of a clearly established right. Harwick's threshold defense is qualified immunity. [1] Harlow v. … Clearly, qualified immunity is appropriate only where assertions of fact by the plaintiff do not rise to the level of a clearly established constitutional violation.