Case law

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.

SUMMERVILLE v. NEW JERSEY STATE TROOPERS JOHN DOES 1-10

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 8, 2022

Gregory was entitled to qualified immunity for the initial stop, while holding that DSFC Ciano was entitled to qualified immunity. … The second prong of qualified immunity asks whether the right at issue was so clearly established that the officer should have known that he or she was committing a constitutional violation under the circumstances.

Froemming v. City of West Allis

District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Feb 5, 2021

Qualified immunity provides government officials a shield from civil liability under § 1983 “insofar as their [discretionary] conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … To defeat a defense of qualified immunity, a plaintiff need not point to a case that is 4Courts may exercise “their sound discretion in deciding which of the two prongs of the qualified-immunity analysis should be

Kristeen Foote v. Nancy Berryhill

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 10, 2019

The CDIU search violated the Fourth Amendment, but the violation was not egregious because the unconstitutionality of the search was not clearly established as of February 2015, and no evidence—including footage of the … McMullen, 907 F.3d 1139, 1152–53 (9th Cir. 2018) (holding that a similar search violated the Fourth Amendment, but granting qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that the conduct was unconstitutional

Kevin McCourt v. Miguel Angel Delgado

241 W. Va. 495 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 24, 2019

Under this standard, the petitioner officers contend they are entitled summary judgment based on qualified immunity because they did not violate any clearly established constitutional rights. … Under a qualified immunity analysis, we must determine whether the petitioner officers' alleged conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.

Bergquist v. Milazzo

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 28, 2021

In the absence of any clearly established precedent forbidding the officers from taking action under these circumstances, Defendants remain entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claims. … Ways, 999 F.3d 478, 491 (7th Cir. 2021) (noting that a plaintiff overcoming a qualified immunity defense must show that the wrongfulness of the defendant’s conduct was clearly established).

Campbell v. Arizona, State of

District Court, D. Arizona · Feb 13, 2023

Cortez, 34 F.4th 783 (9th Cir. 2 2022) (granting motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity because plaintiffs failed to 3 show law was so clearly established that no reasonable person in defendants’ position could … To determine whether 21 qualified immunity applies, courts must consider whether (1) the government official 22 violated the plaintiff’s constitutional right and (2) whether that right was clearly established 23

United States v. John Hardimon

700 F.3d 940 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 7, 2012

The judge had already asked him whether he could think clearly, and he had said he could, which implies that he didn’t think his medications were affecting his ability to think clearly. … Not being a psychiatrist, the judge could not use dosage information to infer inability to think clearly.

Carr v. Scandrett

District Court, N.D. Georgia · Jul 30, 2025

“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 … However, general propositions may still be used to defeat qualified immunity in rare cases. , 843 F.3d at 484 (explaining that “a plaintiff may rely on a broader, clearly established principle that should control the

In Re Litigation Relating to the Riot of September 22, 1991

283 Mont. 277 · Montana Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1997

There, the federal district court had denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, concluding that the defendant's actions violated clearly established law, and the Third Circuit held … Reiterating the well- established standard of qualified immunity articulated in Harlow v.

Sreeram v. Louisiana State University Medical Center-Shreveport

188 F.3d 314 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 16, 1999

The district court found that the record overwhelmingly established that Dr. Sreeram was not qualified to continue as a third year resident and was therefore unable to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. … Sreer-am failed to establish a prima facie case of sex and/or national origin discrimination because she failed to establish that she was qualified for the position in question at all relevant times.

Heleba v. Allbee

160 Vt. 283 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Jan 17, 1992

We conclude, however, that defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. A. … Thus, the test is an objective one, requiring a determination of the objective reasonableness of an official’s conduct, as measured by reference to clearly established law. Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 .

Anderson v. California Department of Correction

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 14, 2022

Qualified Immunity 21 Defendant Ferguson argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not 22 violate Plaintiff’s Eight Amendment rights and because it … To determine whether an 11 officer is entitled to qualified immunity, the Court must consider whether (1) the officer’s conduct 12 violated a constitutional right, and (2) that right was clearly established at the time

Conlin v. Colvin

111 F. Supp. 3d 376 · District Court, W.D. New York · Jun 29, 2015

She noted that N.T.C.B. had problems speaking clearly. (Tr. 169). … It is well established *387 that teacher questionnaires are considered valid “other source” opinions. See Hart, 2014 WL 916747 , at *5; Spruill ex rel. J.T. v.

Koch v. City of Del City

660 F.3d 1228 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 2, 2011

established and thus the officer was entitled to qualified immunity. … We therefore do not need to reach the “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity to conclude that the district court correctly granted summary judgment in favor of Officer Beech. 4.

Mark Porter v. Jean Hill

402 F. App'x 285 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 2, 2010

Defendants were entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity because the law concerning the opening of prisoners’ legal mail outside their presence was not clearly established at the time the alleged violations … Ct. 808, 822 (2009) (concluding that state officers were entitled to qualified immunity because their actions did not violate clearly established law); Sherman v.

Blankenship v. Louisville-Jefferson County Metro Government, Kentucky

District Court, W.D. Kentucky · Mar 21, 2024

clearly established at the time of the arrest.” … Mich. 2015) (holding defendant did not adequately raise qualified immunity because he “must do more than quote legal standards on what counts as clearly-established law” when “[h]e merely quote[d] standards governing the

Schmitt v. LANGENOUR

162 Wash. App. 397 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 28, 2011

Qualified Immunity ¶14 Schmitt contends that Forbes was not entitled to qualified immunity on his § 1983 claims of false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution because she *405 violated a clearly established … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “[glovemment officials performing discretionary functions” are immune from § 1983 suits “if their conduct is objectively reasonable when measured against clearly established law.”

Levinsky v. Diamond

151 Vt. 178 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Feb 17, 1989

So, too, we find that none of the alleged actions by the assistant attorneys general violated clearly established laws or rights, and we thus conclude that they also meet the second prong of the qualified immunity test. … In addition, their appearance violated no clearly established rights of plaintiff.

Jeffrey Frost & A. v. Michael Delaney & A

168 N.H. 353 · Supreme Court of New Hampshire · Nov 17, 2015

We begin by reviewing the doctrine of qualified immunity. The doctrine of qualified immunity is a creature of federal law. Id. at 42. … In other words, the official is entitled to immunity unless her actions violated “legal norms clearly established at the time of the challenged actions.” Richardson v.