Case law

Barnes v. Harling

368 F. Supp. 3d 573 · District Court, W.D. New York · Mar 18, 2019

"Qualified immunity insulates public officials from claims for damages where their conduct does not violate 'clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.' " Defore … Accordingly, the Court finds the relevant law as to the SHU lighting conditions was not clearly established at the time of Plaintiff's incarceration at the Monroe County Jail, and Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity

Fred Watson v. Eddie Boyd, III

2 F.4th 1106 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 30, 2021

or statutory right; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.’” … Accordingly, because of the district court’s incomplete analysis on both the constitutional violation and clearly established prongs, we can neither affirm nor reverse the denial of qualified immunity.

Constantine v. Rectors and Visitors of George Mason University

411 F.3d 474 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 13, 2005

In the qualified-immunity context, the Supreme Court has stressed "the importance of resolving immunity questions at the earliest possible stage in litigation." Saucier v. … GMU waived whatever Eleventh Amendment immunity it had when it accepted federal funds under a statute that clearly and unambiguously conditioned receipt of such funds on a waiver of immunity.

Irish v. State of ME

849 F.3d 521 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Mar 1, 2017

come away understanding that it [wa]s not a clearly established violation of Ms. … Lewis, 648 F.3d 24, 32 (1st Cir. 2011) (qualified immunity protects officers from liability "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established . . . constitutional rights of which a reasonable

MACK v. AVERTEST, LLC

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 2020

Darrah would be entitled to qualified immunity if reasonable officials in her position “could have believed, in light of clearly established law, that their conduct comported with established legal standards.” … Supp. at 335 (“A qualified immunity only protects defendants if it can be shown that they did not violate any clearly established constitutional or statutory rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Brodie Faughn and Billy Colvin v. Alfred Kennedy and Wayne Kennedy

2019 Ark. App. 570 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Dec 4, 2019

Qualified immunity protects an officer from liability in an excessive-force case unless the officer’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known … The second step of the qualified-immunity inquiry—whether the constitutional or statutory right was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct— requires the victim to point to a previously decided

Rockford Life Insurance v. Illinois Department of Revenue

482 U.S. 182 · Supreme Court of the United States · Jun 8, 1987

Davis is clearly lacking, and its absence is critical in view of the purposes behind the intergovernmental tax immunity doctrine. … H — < 1 — i A court must proceed carefully when asked to recognize an exemption from state taxation that Congress has not clearly established.

SWEENEY v. MULL

District Court, S.D. Indiana · Jan 11, 2022

Fletcher, 522 U.S. 118, 129–31 (1997) (prosecutor entitled to absolute immunity for preparing and filing documents, but not for personally swearing to the truth of facts establishing probable cause, which was the function … Litscher, 267 F.3d 648, 651–52 (7th Cir. 2001) (dismissal at pleading stage on qualified immunity grounds is often inappropriate because qualified immunity "usually depends" on the facts of the case).

Neil Nyber v. City of Battle Creek

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 11, 2026

Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. … The clearly established prong of the qualified immunity inquiry sets a high standard, and the United States Supreme Court has “aggressively enforced qualified immunity.” Morden, 275 Mich App 340-341.

Town of Southwest Ranches v. Kalam

980 So. 2d 1121 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 12, 2008

a clearly established right). … As Kalam’s complaint fails to show that the town officials’ conduct violated his rights in light of clearly established law, the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from suit.

Starko, Inc. v. Gallegos

140 N.M. 136 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Apr 26, 2006

Qualified immunity should be recognized where, under the particular facts, it was objectively reasonable for the government official to believe that his or her acts did not violate a clearly established right. Yount v. … Holloway, 510 U.S. 510, 515 , 114 S.Ct. 1019 , 127 L.Ed.2d 344 (1994) (describing Davis as answering the “discrete question: Is qualified immunity defeated where a defendant violates any clearly established duty, including

the Estate of Emzie Allen, Gloria Brown, Ind., and on Behalf of All Wrongful Death Beneficiaries v. Polly Ryon Hospital Authority D/B/A Polly Ryon Memorial Hospital and Suklesh Dandona, M.D.

Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Mar 3, 2005

purported expert is qualified. … that the person rendering the opinion . . . is a qualified medical expert.”)

Dimitris Desyllas v. Daniel Bernstine Roderic Diman John Fowler Rick Roe

351 F.3d 934 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 9, 2003

rights were clearly established. … Accordingly, we need not consider the second part of the qualified immunity analysis — whether the constitutional rights were clearly established. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

Michael Hampton v. State of California

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 3, 2023

Plaintiff’s due process right to familial association with her husband is therefore not “clearly established,” id. at 887 (quotation marks omitted), and Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the familial-association … qualified immunity”). ** The Honorable Richard D.

Leo v. Trevino

285 S.W.3d 470 · Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Jun 8, 2006

Constitutional Violation The first prong of any analysis of the availability of qualified immunity requires the establishment of the violation of a “clearly established right.” Beck, 204 F.3d at 638. … The School District Employees are entitled to qualified immunity from the Trevinos’ claims, absent a showing of a violation of “clearly established constitutional law.”

Carrillo v. Rostro

114 N.M. 607 · New Mexico Supreme Court · Aug 28, 1992

Applying this proposition to a request for qualified immunity, we examine whether the opposing party has presented evidence to support a violation of clearly established law, so as to require a trial on the merits. … Finding that plaintiff had this clearly established right, however, does not quite dispose of the qualified-immunity issue in this case, because in order to determine whether defendants unconstitutionally infringed her right

Ministerio Roca Solida v. Sharon McKelvey

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 4, 2016

Additionally, the Court finds that qualified immunity does not apply.” … Ct. 2074, 2080 (2011) (“Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages . . . .”).

Antonio v. Board of County Commissioners for the County of Cibola

District Court, D. New Mexico · Sep 2, 2020

Although this determination ends the qualified immunity analysis in favor of Defendants Lucero and Hildenbrant, the Court also will examine whether Plaintiff meets the second qualified immunity prong, the “clearly established … For the above reasons, the Court determines that Plaintiff has not demonstrated that she meets the clearly established right requirement, the second qualified immunity prong, necessary to defeat qualified immunity.

Lyons v. City of Lewiston

666 A.2d 95 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Oct 19, 1995

“The two-part test for denial of qualified immunity is (1) whether the plaintiffs constitutional rights were violated, and (2) whether those rights were so clearly established that reasonable defendants would have known that … As we have recently stated, The application of the qualified immunity doctrine turns on the “objective legal reasonableness” of the official’s action viewed in fight of the “clearly established” legal rules at the time the

McGarry v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners for the Cnty. of Lincoln

294 F. Supp. 3d 1170 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Feb 28, 2018

The Court concludes that: (i) Wood used excessive force, but he is entitled to qualified immunity, because the right was not clearly established; (ii) the Officers are entitled to qualified immunity on the malicious prosecution … Although the Tenth Circuit has recognized a sliding scale for qualified immunity's clearly established inquiry, see Casey v.