Case law

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.

Rzeszewski

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 2026

Garcia, and because no clearly established rights are at issue, Officer Rzeszewski is entitled to qualified immunity. Doc. 26 at 21—28. In opposition, Dr. … Garcia had a clearly established right to be free from arrest and prosecution absent probable cause, qualified immunity does not protect Officer Rzeszewski. Doc. 33 at 16-17.

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.

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

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.

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.

Commonwealth v. Robinson

399 Pa. Super. 199 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 5, 1990

Appellant’s second issue relates to the expert testimony offered by the Commonwealth to establish that the drugs possessed by appellant were for delivery to others, rather than for personal use. … If accepted by the jury, as it clearly was, it provided an adequate basis upon which to conclude that the Commonwealth proved the intent to deliver element of the crime charged. Commonwealth v.

Schnabel v. Tyler

230 Conn. 735 · Supreme Court of Connecticut · Aug 9, 1994

Furthermore, “[e]ven where the law is clearly established and the scope of an official’s permissible conduct is clearly defined, the qualified immunity defense also protects an official if it was objectively reasonable for … view that the clearly established law prong was dispositive of the qualified immunity defense.

HINDMAN v. CITY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 16, 2024

The basis for his assertion is strangely worded, but he appears to be arguing that the constitutional right was not “clearly established” at the time he acted because “[t]here is no clearly established right to be free … the defendant’s conduct violated a clearly established right.”

Knight v. State of Oklahoma

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Apr 12, 2022

Qualified Immunity – Scully and Sugg Defendants Scully and Sugg also have pending a motion to dismiss, making various arguments including that their actions are shielded by qualified immunity. … Jordan, 958 F.2d 332, 336 (10th Cir. 1992) (noting discovery should not be allowed until the court resolves the threshold question of clearly established law).

Altshuler v. City of Seattle

63 Wash. App. 389 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 18, 1991

Kitsap Cy., supra (police officers entitled to qualified immunity where nature and scope of plaintiffs' right to gather shellfish not clearly established); cf. Harper v. … To overcome a qualified immunity defense, a plaintiff must do more than identify a clearly established legal test and then allege that the defendant has violated it.

Corum v. University of North Carolina Ex Rel. Board of Governors

97 N.C. App. 527 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 20, 1990

Similarly, the Court concluded that denial of a public official’s claim of qualified immunity from suit, to the extent that it turns on the legal questions of whether the conduct complained of violated “clearly established … Further, the qualified immunity argument turns on the issue of whether “clearly established law” has been violated. Harlow, supra. In accord with Mitchell v.

Stevens v. Stearns

175 Vt. 428 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Aug 1, 2003

Plaintiffs argue that issue preclusion is inappropriate here because the standard for establishing qualified immunity in cases involving alleged violations of Chapter I, Article Eleven of the Vermont Constitution should be … The federal court assessed defendants’ actions in light of this “clearly established” right. We are asked to conduct the same analysis here. *437 ¶ 23.

Romero v. Sanchez

119 N.M. 690 · New Mexico Supreme Court · Apr 24, 1995

Believing Officer Sanchez violated clearly established law, we held that he was not entitled to qualified immunity. … The Act was passed prior to the genesis of the modern qualified immunity law established in Harlow.

Junior v. Reed

693 So. 2d 586 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 20, 1997

The trial court should have sustained Commissioner Junior's claim of qualified immunity, however, because the conduct forming the basis of the complaint by the Reeds does not amount to a violation of a clearly established … To qualify as a "clearly established" right as that phrase is used in Harlow v.

Cherry Knoll, L.L.C. v. HDR Engineering, Incorpora

922 F.3d 309 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 22, 2019

In response, Jones moved to dismiss on the basis of qualified immunity. … “Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability when they are acting within their discretionary authority and their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional law of which a reasonable

Treneshia Dukes v. Nicholas Deaton

852 F.3d 1035 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 26, 2017

Qualified immunity also protects Branham because his subordinate’s constitutional violation was not clearly established. A. Deaton is Entitled to Qualified Immunity. … Branham is entitled to qualified immunity because Deaton’s conduct was not a clearly established violation of the Fourth Amendment.

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.

The Estate of Roosevelt Holliman v. Turner

District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Sep 1, 2023

constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … Once qualified immunity has been “raised as a defense by a defendant, … the plaintiffs have the burden of establishing the proof and arguments necessary to overcome it.” Strickland v. City of Crenshaw, 114 F.