Case law

Morales Mancia v. Elam

District Court, W.D. Virginia · Sep 13, 2021

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability “so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … To determine whether the law was clearly established for qualified immunity purposes, a court “‘ordinarily need not look beyond the decisions of the Supreme Court, [the] court of appeals, and the highest court of the state

Vega v. Semple

963 F.3d 259 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 29, 2020

Accordingly, the District Court denied Defendants qualified immunity for conduct alleged to have occurred after Helling, decided on June 18, 1993, finding the right to be clearly established as of that date. … In denying defendants qualified immunity on this claim, we first noted that a prisoner’s right to a meaningful opportunity for physical exercise had been clearly established since 1985. Id. at *6 (citing Anderson v.

Sossamon v. Lone Star St Texas

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 17, 2009

As for the individual-capacity claims for damages under the First Amendment, we note that the defendants who Sossamon sued enjoy qualified immunity as government actors.76 Whether Sossamon could establish a violation of the … Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 205-06 (1996) (“[T]he qualified immunity defense shield[s] [government agents] from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Clark v. Stone

District Court, W.D. Kentucky · Jul 28, 2020

In the qualified immunity context, when determining whether a right is truly clearly established, a court must consider the “specific context of the case” and avoid construing rights too generally. Saucier v. … It is enough that such a right, even if it does exist in the Sixth Circuit, is not clearly established. Accordingly, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.

Perry v. Durborow

892 F.3d 1116 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 12, 2018

See Riggins, 572 F.3d at 1107 (noting that to overcome qualified-immunity defense, “plaintiff must demonstrate . . . that the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged unlawful activity” (emphasis added)). … Nevertheless, Durborow is entitled to qualified immunity unless Perry can also show that the law was clearly established at the time of the constitutional violation. Riggins, 572 F.3d at 1107. B.

Saenz v. G4S Secure Solutions (USA), Inc.

224 F. Supp. 3d 477 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Dec 20, 2016

“Therefore, a plaintiff seeking to overcome qualified immunity must show: (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct … General Qualified Immunity Analysis Turning to whether Plaintiff has overcome Defendant Romero’s claim of qualified immunity, the Court must determine *483 whether (1) Plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established

Gubitosi v. Kapica

154 F.3d 30 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 19, 1998

Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 309 , 116 S.Ct. 834 , 133 L.Ed.2d 773 (1996)), and proceed to consider whether the qualified immunity defense is established as a matter of law. 4 Here the gravamen of Kapica’s qualified immunity … As a result, his qualified immunity defense is established as a matter of law. (2) Accordingly, we vacate so much of the district court’s order of May 9, 1997 as denied Kapica’s motion for summary judgment based on qualified

Feis v. King County Sheriff's Department

165 Wash. App. 525 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 19, 2011

Ed. 2d 836 (2006) (“The nub of qualified immunity is the need to induce officials to show reasonable initiative when the relevant law is not ‘clearly established’; a quick resolution of a qualified immunity claim is essential … established right so as to rebut *551 the officers’ assertion of qualified immunity.

Krueger v. Lyng

4 F.3d 653 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 13, 1993

The defendants then moved for summary judgment, arguing that they were protected by qualified immunity. … “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 person would have

Brown v. Jenne

122 So. 3d 881 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 1, 2012

Qualified Immunity Standard “ ‘Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages for torts committed while performing discretionary duties unless their conduct violates a clearly established … As to the second determination for qualified immunity, the Thompson court found that the excessiveness of the force was clearly established at the time of the incident, which in Thompson occurred in 1998.

Roberts v. Swain

126 N.C. App. 712 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 15, 1997

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … However, qualified immunity could operate to shield Swain and McCracken from plaintiff’s damages suit “if ‘a reasonable officer could have believed’ ” plaintiff’s arrest “ ‘to be lawful, in light of clearly established law

Robbins v. Bureau of Land Management

252 F. Supp. 2d 1286 · District Court, D. Wyoming · Mar 21, 2003

Qualified Immunity. … A federal employee is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct was objectively reasonable in light of the clearly established rights at issue.

Montgomery v. Lore

District Court, D. Colorado · Aug 17, 2022

Defendant argues for dismissal of all claims on the grounds of qualified immunity, as Plaintiff fails to cite to clearly established law and cannot show that Defendant did not have reasonable suspicion. … CONCLUSION Defendant should be entitled to qualified immunity because he possessed reasonable suspicion, and Plaintiff has failed to cite to clearly established law.

Matthews v. Rakiey

38 Mass. App. Ct. 490 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · May 5, 1995

(b) Clearly established right. We must next inquire whether the defendant’s conduct nonetheless violated a clearly established right of the plaintiff. … Since the defendant’s actions were discretionary and they did not violate any clearly established rights of the plaintiff, qualified immunity was warranted.

EIVICH v. EAST GREENWICH TOWNSHIP

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 12, 2025

Beyond reciting the standard for qualified immunity and reiterating their argument as to why the excessive force should be dismissed, defendants do not expressly argue how or why Robostello is entitled to qualified immunity … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (“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

Robert Bardo v. K. Clendenin

474 F. App'x 673 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 23, 2012

The district court properly held that defendant prison officials were entitled to qualified immunity because Bardo did not have a clearly established First Amendment right to retain the ad depicting side-view nudity. … Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 739 (2002) (“For a constitutional right to be clearly established, its contours must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.”

Maini v. Town of Norton

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 28, 2023

Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001), a qualified immunity case involving allegations of the excessive use of force in restraining an unruly crowd of demonstrators protesting an appearance by the Vice President, the Supreme Court … Isbell, 207 F.3d 1253, 1257 (11th Cir. 2000) (trial court erred in refusing to grant qualified immunity where plaintiff despite being held against a van in a knee hold while being handcuffed could point to nothing more

Barnett v. Mount Vernon Police Department

523 F. App'x 811 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 3, 2013

The defense will succeed only where entitlement to qualified immunity can be established “based [solely] on facts appearing on the face of the complaint.” McKenna v. Wright, 386 F.3d 432, 436 (2d Cir. 2004). … The existence of either actual probable cause or arguable probable cause establishes qualified immunity from a false arrest claim, see Savino, 331 F.3d at 76; therefore, the sole issue on this appeal is whether the defendants

Jeffrey Leiser v. Karen Kloth

933 F.3d 696 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 1, 2019

for qualified immun- ity. … Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity is a doctrine that “protects govern- ment officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or con- stitutional rights

Messerschmidt v. Millender

565 U.S. 535 · Supreme Court of the United States · Feb 22, 2012

“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 … the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.”