Case law

McQueen v. Williams

587 So. 2d 918 · Mississippi Supreme Court · Oct 16, 1991

The state law and the affidavits submitted by [McQueen] clearly establish that the Sheriff's actions, as done in the totality of circumstances, were totally discretionary. … a claim of violation of clearly established law."

Sause v. Bauer

859 F.3d 1270 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 20, 2017

First, she argues that the defendants aren’t entitled to qualified immunity because they violated her clearly established rights under the First Amendment. … Second, she argues that even assuming the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because the contours of that right aren’t clearly established, the doctrine of qualified immunity doesn’t shield them from her claims

Pinkins v. City of Racine

District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Mar 30, 2022

The use of such force establishes a constitutional violation, and if the right violated was clearly established at the time of the officer’s actions, then qualified immunity does not attach. … If one view of the disputed facts could lead a jury to conclude that an officer violated a clearly established constitutional right, the officer may not seek qualified immunity based on an alternative, more advantageous

Rowan County v. Sloas

201 S.W.3d 469 · Kentucky Supreme Court · Sep 26, 2006

official immunity; and, for the Jailer and Henderson in their individual capacities, on grounds of qualified official immunity. … THE YANERO TEST FOR QUALIFIED OFFICIAL IMMUNITY Under Yanero , public officers and employees are entitled to “qualified official immunity” for negligent conduct when the negligent act or omissions were (1) discretionary acts

Daniels, Michael v. Knight, Stanley

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 5, 2007

The Strickland framework was clearly established by the time the Indiana trial court denied Daniels’ first post-conviction appeal on February 21, 1985. … See Williams, 529 U.S. at 391 (“It is past question No. 05-2620 13 that the rule set forth in Strickland qualifies as ‘clearly established Federal law, as determined by the

Hale v. Walterbach

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 24, 2024

To defeat qualified immunity, a plaintiff 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 … “If the defendant’s actions violated a clearly established constitutional right” courts examine “whether qualified immunity is still appropriate because the defendant’s actions were objectively reasonable in light

Long v. Boucher

District Court, D. Utah · Nov 24, 2020

To overcome this defense, a plaintiff must establish that the officer asserting qualified immunity “violated a federal statutory or constitutional right” and that “the unlawfulness of [her] conduct was clearly established … The court must accordingly turn to whether Detective Boucher is entitled to qualified immunity on the ground that her actions were objectively reasonable in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the

Julie Ballou v. James McElvain

29 F.4th 413 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 28, 2021

As Ballou’s disparate treatment claim alleged that McElvain violated her clearly established rights under the Equal Protection Clause, McElvain was not entitled to qualified immunity on that claim. … As Ballou’s disparate treatment claim alleged that McElvain violated her clearly established rights under the Equal Protection Clause, McElvain is not entitled to qualified immunity on that claim.

Birdo v. Gomez

214 F. Supp. 3d 709 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 17, 2016

qualified immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

Arlane James v. New Jersey State Police

957 F.3d 165 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 21, 2020

Qualified immunity protects government officials from being held liable for damages when their conduct does not violate a citizen’s clearly established rights. … Trooper Bartelt is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate Gibbons’s clearly established rights.

DeWald v. State

719 P.2d 643 · Wyoming Supreme Court · May 23, 1986

City of Green River, supra, does not establish a qualified immunity for the act of driving a patrol car. … Clearly, either choice posed a risk to the citizens of Laramie.

PAULOS VS. FCH1, LLC

2020 NV 2 · Nevada Supreme Court · Jan 30, 2020

Mahan concluded that Officer Baca was entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate a clearly established constitutional right. Paulos v. … Noting the two-prong showing for overcoming qualified immunity—that (1) the officers violated a constitutional right and (2) the right was clearly established—the Ninth Circuit used its

Moresi v. State, Dept. of Wildlife & Fisheries

567 So. 2d 1081 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Sep 6, 1990

Further, the defendants have clearly carried their burden of pleading qualified immunity. … If the defendant shows that the state constitutional right alleged to have been violated was not clearly established, the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.

A. D. v. State of Calif. Highway Patrol

712 F.3d 446 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 3, 2013

The Court then rejected the notion that the law, defined at such a level of generality, was “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes. … Markgraf is not entitled to qualified immunity, because Plaintiffs have shown that he violated the foregoing clearly established law.

James A. Conrad v. New Hampshire Department of Safety & a.

167 N.H. 59 · Supreme Court of New Hampshire · Nov 6, 2014

Qualified immunity protects police officers “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 known. … It is clear from the Supreme Court’s description of the second, “clearly established” step of the qualified immunity analysis that the second step, in turn, has two aspects.

Jennifer L.M. LeMay v. Michael B. Mays

18 F.4th 283 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 15, 2021

Clearly Established We then turn to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis⸺whether the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct. See Dillard, 961 F.3d at 1052. … and entitling him to qualified immunity.

United States v. Bennett

868 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jul 5, 2017

On that basis, we held that the defendant's conviction could not qualify as a conviction for a crime that had as an element the "use . . . of physical force" because the "government ha[d] not established the offense of harmful … If anything, then, the force clause in § 16 would seem to be less clearly encompassing of reckless conduct than the residual clause in § 16.

Daniels v. CITY OF HARTFORD, ALA.

645 F. Supp. 2d 1036 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Aug 18, 2009

In the context of qualified immunity cases that turn on the presence or absence of probable cause, an official has not committed a clearly established constitutional violation if either actual or arguable probable cause existed … a clearly established constitutional right. 12 Thus, the Court finds that Sheriff Olsen is protected from suit for the conditions of confinement at the Dale County Detention Facility by the doctrine of qualified immunity

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.

Andrew B. Bloom v. Melissa Peacock

498 F. App'x 867 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 19, 2012

Further, a defense of qualified immunity may be addressed in a motion to dismiss, which will be granted if the “complaint fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.” St. George v. … To determine if an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, courts must determine (i) whether the plaintiff’s allegations establish a constitutional violation, and (ii) whether the constitutional violation was clearly