Case law

Gentile v. Bauder

718 So. 2d 781 · Supreme Court of Florida · Sep 24, 1998

Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from civil damages to the extent that "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … probable cause under clearly established precedent.

Penterman v. Wisconsin Electric Power Co.

211 Wis. 2d 458 · Wisconsin Supreme Court · Jul 2, 1997

Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability if their conduct does not violate a person's clearly established constitutional rights. Harlow v. … Merely alleging a general violation of a right that may be clearly established in the constitution is insufficient to justify withholding qualified immunity. Barnhill, 166 Wis. 2d at 408 .

City of Lakewood v. Brace

20 Brief Times Rptr. 981 · Supreme Court of Colorado · Jun 24, 1996

violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … immunity to appeal a district court’s denial of summary judgment on that defense if the issue on appeal is whether the constitutional right that was allegedly violated was “clearly established.”

Collvins v. Hackford

523 F. App'x 515 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 3, 2013

To defeat a defense of qualified immunity on summary judgment, however, the plaintiff carries the burden of establishing that the defendant violated a constitutional right which was clearly established. … The district court held that because there is no clearly established law indicating that the delay in Mr. Collvins’ hearing was unconstitutional, he was entitled to qualified immunity. Again, we agree.

Smith v. Washtenaw Intermediate School District

District Court, E.D. Michigan · Jan 24, 2020

Qualified immunity will apply when the injury Plaintiff alleges is taken by the collective action of Defendants, not individual defendants. See Humphrey v. … Mabry, 482 F.3d 840, 847 (6th Cir. 2007) (individual officers are entitled to qualified immunity even when they collectively had sufficient knowledge to figure out that they were violating the plaintiff’s clearly established

Ana Sandoval v. County of San Diego

985 F.3d 657 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 13, 2021

Because we reversed the district court’s denial of qualified immunity based on the objective elements of clearly established law, we expressly declined to consider, for qualified immunity purposes, how the subjective elements … As the court explained, “we assess qualified immunity based on the law that was ‘clearly established at the time an action occurred,’” and at the time of the shooting in Kedra, “it was not yet clearly established whether

Price v. Davis

132 N.C. App. 556 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 16, 1999

, and qualified immunity. … to qualified immunity.

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.

Carter v. Cole

526 N.W.2d 209 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Mar 14, 1995

Normally, evaluating a claim of qualified immunity involves two inquiries: (1) “whether the plaintiff has alleged the violation of a clearly established constitutional right”; and (2) whether an officer could reasonably have … Qualified immunity ⅜ * * establishes a right not to be tried. When rules of law clearly establish public officials’ duty, the immunity defense is unavailable.

Duarte v. Healy

405 Mass. 43 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · May 10, 1989

The first was common law immunity, as variously expressed in our cases, and the second was a qualified immunity patterned after Federal qualified immunity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Id. at 35, 38 . … Furthermore, the Supreme Court already had established the basic two-part test for determining to what discretionary functions the doctrine of qualified immunity applies.

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.

Lawson v. Garcia

912 P.2d 1136 · Wyoming Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1996

Qualified immunity is, of course, an affirmative defense; but once it is raised, the plaintiff has the burden of proving that the federal rights allegedly impaired by the defendant were clearly established at the time the … CONCLUSION Since Garcia failed to demonstrate that Lawson violated a clearly established federal right, Lawson is entitled to invoke the defense of qualified immunity.

Sharp v. Liebel

District Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 13, 2021

He previously only raised a qualified immunity argument on that issue. … 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

Stephens v. Geoghegan

702 So. 2d 517 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 17, 1997

If the public official's conduct did not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right, the official is immune. Here, there can be no question that the defendants satisfied their initial burden. … Because Stephens, Upman and Worlds did not violate Geoghegan's clearly established statutory or constitutional rights, as delineated in Loudermill , they are entitled to qualified immunity from his federal civil rights claim

Henriquez v. Farmers Branch Texas

District Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 8, 2021

The established procedure under which courts must address qualified immunity, once asserted, therefore “prevents a defendant entitled to immunity from being compelled to bear the costs of discovery and other pre-trial … to qualified immunity.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Daugevelo v. County Of Sullivan

District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 22, 2020

The doctrine of qualified immunity protects officials from liability for civil damages when, “(a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant to … If an officer’s belief that his action does not violate clearly established law is “objectively reasonable,” he is shielded from liability by qualified immunity. Cooper v. City of New Rochelle, 925 F.