Case law

Burkhart v. Saxbe

596 F. Supp. 96 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 22, 1984

Whether an official may prevail in his qualified immunity defense depends upon the “objective reasonableness of [his] conduct as measured by reference to clearly established law.” ... … No other “circumstances” are relevant to the issue of qualified immunity. We conclude that the District Court correctly held that appellee has demonstrated no violation of his clearly established constitutional rights.

Dillon Burnett v. Josh Griffith

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 12, 2022

Whether Sergeant Griffith is entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil-damages liability for violations of “clearly established statutory or constitutional … established” prong of the qualified-immunity analysis.

ESTATE OF ANDRE ALEXANDER GREEN v. CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 13, 2019

Qualified immunity “[Q]ualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Dkt. 38 at 30.1 The Court exercises its discretion to begin with the second, “clearly established law” prong of the qualified-immunity test. See Pearson, 555 U.S. at 236. Mr.

Daniel Jackson v. Shawn Curry

888 F.3d 259 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 19, 2018

That decision itself does not involve a pure legal issue regarding qualified immunity, i.e., whether the officers violated Jackson’s clearly established constitutional rights. … plausibly violated clearly established rights.

Fleming v. City of Bridgeport

284 Conn. 502 · Supreme Court of Connecticut · Dec 4, 2007

clearly established law or (2) it was objectively reasonable for him to believe that his actions did not violate clearly established law.” … The plaintiff contends that the municipal defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity because they violated clearly established law under the fourth amendment when they effected an unlawful seizure of her property by

Goard v. Crown Auto, Inc.

170 F. Supp. 3d 915 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Mar 21, 2016

Defendants’ have failed to establish Qualified Immunity Howard, Ball, Cook, and McKinley assert that qualified immunity shields them from liability for their actions. Dkt. 28 at 4.. … established' for purposes of qualified immunity.

(PC) Williams v. Pilkerten

District Court, E.D. California · May 13, 2020

Qualified 19 immunity shields government officials from civil damages unless their conduct violates “clearly 20 established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” 21 Harlow … right, and if so, whether 28 the right was clearly established.

Guthrie v. Guthrie

216 F. Supp. 3d 590 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 25, 2016

Citizens have a clearly established right to be free from excessive force while restrained. 57 In light of this clearly established right, district courts tend to deny qualified immunity in cases where the reasonableness … Conclusion We are not aware of a clearly established right for a citizen not to be restrained while suffering a grand mal seizure. We apply qualified immunity to Mr. Guthrie’s Fourth Amendment seizure claim.

Fort Wayne Community Schools and Jacalyn Butler v. Steffanie Haney, for next friend and minor daughter, M.H.

94 N.E.3d 325 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 5, 2018

And the burden is on the plaintiff to demonstrate the violation of a clearly established right. Id. … immunity because there were clearly established doctrines at the time as to what actions a caseworker must take when conducting an investigation)

Dontrell Stephens v. Ric Bradshaw

879 F.3d 1157 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 10, 2018

the allegedly violated right was clearly established by governing case law. … Yet, Deputy Lin would still be entitled to qualified immunity if the law were not clearly established.

Garcia v. S.U.N.Y. Health Sciences Center of Brooklyn

280 F.3d 98 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 25, 2001

The Court held that Title I of the ADA, which prohibits the states, municipalities and other employers from “discri-minat[ing] against a qualified individual with a disability because of th[at] disability ... in regard to … These cases are unpersuasive because they focus exclusively on whether Congress clearly expressed its intention to condition waiver on the receipt of funds and whether the state in fact received the funds.

Caneyville Volunteer Fire Department v. Green's Motorcycle Salvage, Inc.

286 S.W.3d 790 · Kentucky Supreme Court · Jun 25, 2009

However, even if an act is discretionary, there is no immunity if it violates constitutional, statutory, or other clearly established rights, or if it is done willfully or maliciously with intent to harm, or if it is committed … Accordingly, in order to charge liability, a complainant may not merely allege injury, but must point to “a causally related Violation of a constitutional, statutory, or other clearly established right,’ ” Sloas, 201 S.W.3d

Brooks v. Sweeney

299 Conn. 196 · Supreme Court of Connecticut · Dec 14, 2010

The court further explained that, under federal law, the doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil actions arising out of their discretionary acts if such acts did not violate clearly established … clearly established law.

Doe v. Leach

128 N.M. 28 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Jul 15, 1999

The defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff demonstrates that the federal right so violated was a right “clearly established” at the time of the alleged violation. See Harlow v. … clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

Blanton v. Kooser

District Court, D. Kansas · May 30, 2024

Kooser and Huffman invoke qualified immunity in response to Blanton’s claim. Doc. 18 at 6, 10. Qualified immunity attempts to bal- ance competing interests. … If she states a constitutional claim, the next question is whether the law was clearly established. Discerning whether the relevant legal rule was clearly established is a narrow and context-specific exercise.

Lancie v. Giles

132 Pa. Commw. 255 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 1990

The present standard for determining if qualified immunity applies was first established in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), in which case the U.S. … Supreme Court stated that qualified immunity will be found if an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established rights which a reasonable person should have known. Id. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. at 2738 .

Latonya Burton v. West Virginia Division of Corrections and John and Jane Does

Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia · Jun 27, 2025

Burton failed to plead that the respondents were in violation of a clearly established right. … The question as to whether an employee was acting within the scope of their employment relates to qualified immunity as follows: If the plaintiff identifies a clearly established right or law which has been

DelPriore v. McClure

District Court, D. Alaska · Jan 3, 2020

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government actors from civil liability under § 1983 if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … City of Fresno, 918 F.3d 1031, 1035 (9th Cir. 2019). 67 See Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232 (“Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right

Heard, Anthony v. HSUM Adams

District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Jul 31, 2025

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, a plaintiff may not obtain damages for a constitutional violation against a public official unless the plaintiff shows that the official violated clearly established … For purposes of qualified immunity, that legal duty need not be litigated and then established disease by disease or injury by injury.”).

Dehn Motor Sales, LLC v. Schultz

439 Md. 460 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 22, 2014

But there’s enough that’s involved that it certainly raised it to qualified immunity, I mean to show that it was not clearly established. … established law, and therefore, were entitled to qualified immunity.