Case law

Parent Father Doe and Parent Mother Doe, Individually on their own behalf and as Parents and Next Friend for Minor Doe v. Western Dubuque Community School District, Jessica Pape, Dan Butler, and Scott Firzlaff, in their Official Capacities

Supreme Court of Iowa · May 9, 2025

Third, the plaintiff must plead “that the law was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” Id. … Do the people have a clearly established right, privilege, or immunity to be free from being rear-ended? T-boned? Side-swiped?

Lambert v. RIVERBOAT GAMING ENFORC. DIV.

706 So. 2d 172 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 29, 1997

In support of their application, defendants contend that the trial court erred: (1) in ruling that defendants had established the qualified immunity defense, yet failing to grant their exception of no cause of action and … Accordingly, in Kyle , this court examined the pleadings to determine whether the plaintiff had set forth material facts therein which, if taken as true, showed that defendants had violated a clearly established right of

Creamer v. Sceviour

652 A.2d 110 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Jan 12, 1995

Qualified Immunity A plaintiff may maintain a section 1983 5 claim against governmental employees only if they are not entitled to qualified immunity. … 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 the defendants would have known that their

Irwin v. Santiago

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 8, 2021

Nonetheless, because Irwin has not demonstrated that they violated clearly established law, the Court grants summary judgment to the Defendant–Officers based on qualified immunity.4 1. … The Defendant–Officers did not violate clearly established law.

Huffmier v. Hamilton

30 Kan. App. 2d 1163 · Court of Appeals of Kansas · Oct 25, 2002

established law.” … Second, was the constitutional right clearly established? See McCormick, 272 Kan. at 642 .

Lucas v. Otsego County Sheriff Richard J. Devlin Jr.

139 A.D.3d 1196 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 12, 2016

Supreme Court determined that, among other things, defendants were shielded from liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity and granted their motion. Plaintiff now appeals. We affirm. … Defendants nevertheless have qualified immunity for their conduct if they did "not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known" (Mullenix v Luna, US

Wright v. City Of Philadelphia

409 F.3d 595 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 6, 2005

facts showed a violation of `clearly established' law." … violated was clearly established.

Morelli v. Webster

552 F.3d 12 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jan 7, 2009

Qualified Immunity. This case differs from a garden-variety summary judgment case because it involves the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Given this well-settled jurisprudence, there is no legitimate doubt that the right asserted here was clearly established.

James v. Lee

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 1, 2020

Qualified Immunity 21 “Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly 22 established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … “Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate 17 clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

Herndon v. Henderson Police Department

District Court, D. Nevada · Sep 23, 2023

Defendants are nonetheless entitled to 8 qualified immunity because Plaintiff has not demonstrated that the right was clearly 9 established. … to be clearly established.

Barnes v. Fedele

337 F. Supp. 3d 227 · District Court, W.D. New York · Oct 2, 2018

DISCUSSION Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability for civil damages "if his conduct did not violate plaintiff's *231 clearly established rights or if it would have been objectively reasonable for … The qualified immunity defense in this case largely turns on two considerations: whether the statutory or constitutional right in question was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation, and, if so, whether

Richard Wesley v. Alison Campbell

864 F.3d 433 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 20, 2017

“Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability for civil damages if their conduct does not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” … To determine whether Rigney is entitled to qualified immunity, we must determine whether the facts within the trial record make out a violation of a constitutional right, and whether that right was clearly established “such

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

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

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

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

Dicks Ex Rel. Montgomery v. Jenne

740 So. 2d 576 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 21, 1999

Initially, the trial court denied the motion, finding that Deputy Biernacki had "failed to establish his entitlement to qualified immunity as a matter of law, particularly in light of the court's prior ruling that the arrest … decision on the qualified immunity issue; and the record before this court does not support a finding that the prior rulings were clearly erroneous.

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.

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.