Case law

Jose Saldana v. Antonio Garza and Ricardo Olvera

684 F.2d 1159 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 7, 1982

Rowland, 678 F.2d 1264, 1271 (5th Cir. 1982). 14 In order to breach the qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff must establish that a defendant’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law. Harlow v. … defendant had acted in violation of clearly established law.

W. Va. Board of Education and L. Wade Linger, Jr. v. Jorea M. Marple

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 10, 2015

the constitutional standards clearly established at the time[?]” … the present context to qualified immunity is a clearly legitimate act.”

Sureshbhai Patel v. City of Madison, Alabama

959 F.3d 1330 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 27, 2020

Under this test, the law is clearly established and qualified immunity can be overcome only if the standards set forth in relevant precedent “inevitably lead every reasonable officer in [the defendant’s] position to conclude … ’s] clearly established constitutional rights.”

Marvin v. City of Taylor

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 4, 2007

In other words, qualified immunity need only be granted if there is a violation of a constitutional right, but that right was not clearly established at the time the official violated it. … If, and only if, the force used was objectively unreasonable should the Court consider qualified immunity and address the second question: whether the right violated was clearly established. B.

Paul E. Sherman v. Four County Counseling Center, Douglas Cox, Cass Superior Court Judge, and Gary Boyles, Officer

987 F.2d 397 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 19, 1993

We believe these facts establish that Boyles is entitled to qualified immunity. … He also argues that even if Four County is entitled to qualified immunity, it violated his clearly established right to refuse anti-psychotic medication.

Earsel L. Johnson v. Bill Hay

931 F.2d 456 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 15, 1991

In ascertaining whether Hay is protected by qualified immunity, we must decide “the essentially legal question whether the conduct of which [Johnson] complains violated clearly established law,” and if Johnson’s complaint … Hay claims that his refusal to fill the prescriptions did not violate Johnson’s clearly established rights.

DeVargas v. Mason & Hanger-Silas Mason Co.

844 F.2d 714 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 7, 1988

In reviewing appeals of denials of qualified immunity, our primary concern is not whether defendants violated plaintiffs’ rights, but whether defendants “violate[d] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … If the law was not clearly established at the time defendants acted, they are entitled to qualified immunity. Id.; Mitchell, 472 U.S. at 524 , 105 S.Ct. at 2814 .

Anthony Defrancesco v. Robert C. Robbins

136 F.4th 933 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 7, 2025

established prong of the qualified immunity analysis. … established’ for qualified-immunity purposes.”

Green v. Carlson

826 F.2d 647 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 13, 1987

evidence in the record in establishing the specific facts necessary to frame the qualified immunity analysis. … If the undisputed facts, so read, show that the defendant’s conduct, as a matter of law, violated no clearly established legal norms, then the district court must grant the defendant qualified immunity.

Castillo v. City of Weslaco

369 F.3d 504 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 13, 2004

Finding that the Officers sufficiently alleged a violation of clearly established federal law, the district court denied the Appellants’ motion for summary judgment asserting qualified immunity and scheduled the case for … II Qualified immunity is appropriate if “the defendant’s actions were ‘objectively reasonable’ with reference to ‘clearly established lav/ at the time of the conduct in question.” Petta v.

James Dennis v. City of Philadelphia

19 F.4th 279 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 23, 2021

Humphrey6 and that they are entitled to qualified immunity because Dennis has failed to allege a constitutional violation of clearly established law. … Second, they argue that qualified immunity attaches because the constitutional claims asserted do not involve rights that were clearly established in 1992, when the alleged violations took place.

Tulloch v. Coughlin

50 F.3d 114 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Feb 28, 1995

In contrast, qualified immunity shields government officials from suit if either the official did not violate a “clearly established” right that a “reasonable person” would have been aware of, or it was objectively reasonable … for the official to believe that his actions would not violate a “clearly established” right.

Bob Glasscox v. Argo, City Of, etc.

903 F.3d 1207 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 12, 2018

Glasscox, concluded that Officer Moses violated his clearly established right to be free from the excessive use of force. Officer Moses now appeals the denial of qualified immunity. … Because our law clearly established that such a use of force was excessive, the district court properly denied qualified immunity.

Joshua Barricks v. James Wright

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Mar 3, 2026

established law, we have jurisdiction to grant him qualified immunity. … established law and that he would not be entitled to qualified immunity.

Dinhora Quintero De Quintero v. Awilda Aponte-Roque

974 F.2d 226 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Sep 10, 1992

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Government officials exercising discretionary authority are entitled to qualified immunity in respect to claims under section 1983 “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … A court embarking on an inquiry into qualified immunity must invariably determine whether some right emanating from federal constitutional or statutory law was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged violation.

Shawn Michael Jones, a Minor by His Father and Next Friend, Terry D. Jones, and Terry D. Jones v. Charles Webb, Individually

45 F.3d 178 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 11, 1995

Webb maintains that he is entitled to qualified immunity because the force he applied was not unreasonable in light of established legal principles. See Elder v. … To determine whether immunity attaches, we must consider whether “ ‘a reasonable officer could have believed that [his] conduct was constitutional in light of the clearly established law and the information [the officer]

Sh.A. Ex Rel. J.A. v. Tucumcari Municipal Schools

321 F.3d 1285 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 11, 2003

The framework for analyzing claims of qualified immunity on summary judgment is well settled. … The defendants contended they were entitled to qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established at the relevant time that a public official who used his position to harass a nonemployee violated the Equal

Modica v. Taylor

465 F.3d 174 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 13, 2006

The qualified immunity determination is a two-step inquiry. First, the court must decide whether a plaintiff’s allegations, if true, establish a violation of a clearly established right. Id. … Whether Humphrey is entitled to qualified immunity Humphrey argues that she is entitled to qualified immunity because the FMLA was not clearly established at the time Modica’s employment was terminated.

James E. White v. Leon Taylor, Etc., Clell Harrell

959 F.2d 539 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 29, 1992

is entitled to qualified immunity. … That the right can be identified at this "level of generality" is not sufficient to make it clearly established at the level necessary to deprive Chief Harrell of qualified immunity.

Hernandez v. Goord

312 F. Supp. 2d 537 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 31, 2004

Defendants are Not Entitled to Qualified Immunity Defendants also urge that they are immune from suit pursuant to the doctrine of qualified immunity. … “A government actor performing a discretionary task is entitled to qualified immunity from § 1983 suits if either: (a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for