Case law

Luna v. Thurien

129 F. App'x 381 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 27, 2005

If so, we must then determine whether that right was clearly established at the time of the incident. Id. … Because the facts construed in Luna’s favor establish a violation of Lima’s clearly established rights under the Fourteenth Amendment, Thurien is not entitled to qualified immunity.

Jones v. City of North Las Vegas

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 6, 2026

Because defendants lacked an exigent circumstance to search plaintiffs’ yard under clearly established law at the time of the incident, they were not entitled to qualified immunity. … Under these standards, the Defendant Officers are clearly entitled to qualified immunity.

Kelson v. Clark

1 F.4th 411 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 17, 2021

a qualified immunity defense with equal specificity.” … As to the second prong of qualified immunity, we consider whether Fletcher’s constitutional rights were clearly established at the time plaintiffs allege that he was denied treatment.

Felix Delgado-Brunet v. John L. Clark, Warden, Usp-Marion, Wayne D. Hilliard, Roger Baxter, and Roland Beckman

93 F.3d 339 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 15, 1996

Finally, Hilliard moved for summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity and the lack of any facts tending to show deliberate indifference for purposes of the Eighth Amendment. … The second requires consideration of the standards for Eighth Amendment claims and for assertions of qualified immunity. Our review of both questions is de novo. Farmer v.

Jok v. City of Burlington

96 F.4th 291 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 15, 2024

Defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting that Corrow was entitled to qualified immunity. … If, however, the district court denies qualified immunity because of a dispute over material facts, the appellant must also establish one of the following: (1) that the parties have agreed to “stipulated facts,” (2) that

Morris v. Clifford

903 F.2d 574 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 16, 1990

Defendants appeal from the district court’s 1 denial of their motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. … The sole issue before us is whether defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from individual liability as a matter of law.

Gerald Novak v. William Federspiel

140 F.4th 815 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 20, 2025

For the federal claims, the court held that qualified immunity protected Federspiel in his personal capacity and that, in any event, Novak and Wenzel had not established constitutional violations. … was clearly established at the time.”

Raul De La Rosa v. Mark White

852 F.3d 740 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 27, 2017

To be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes, “[t]he contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.” Anderson v. … In recent years, the Supreme Court has repeatedly reversed decisions denying qualified immunity where lower courts “misunderstood the ‘clearly established’ analysis.” White v. Pauly, 137 S. Ct. 548, 552 (2017).

Martha Derda v. Brighton, Colorado, City Of, and Ted Anderson

53 F.3d 1162 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 28, 1995

Anderson’s motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. … DISCUSSION Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discre *1164 tionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly

Rogers v. Miller

57 F.3d 986 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 22, 1995

Qualified, or "good faith" immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages arising out of the performance of their discretionary functions "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … We hold only that the defendants are immune from damages because no caselaw existing at the time of these events clearly established that such conduct, under the circumstances, constituted "adverse employment action" prohibited

Michael Handt v. Steve Koffron

681 F.3d 939 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 14, 2012

clearly established at the time he was taken into custody. … was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.”

Rupe v. Cate

688 F. Supp. 2d 1035 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 1, 2010

Qualified Immunity Defendants claim that they are entitled to qualified immunity and so Plaintiffs’ constitutional claims should be dismissed. … Because the Complaint does not clearly show that Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, the Court will not entertain that defense now, but Defendants may renew it on any motion for summary judgment. III.

Yorzinski v. Alves

477 F. Supp. 2d 461 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Feb 16, 2007

to the warrant requirement, they are entitled to qualified immunity for their actions -as the law regarding protective sweeps was not clearly established at the time of the search, July 2000, and that, in any event, *469 … Mar. 7, 2006) (rejecting defendants' qualified immunity argument on ground that "there is no Connecticut precedent establishing the same qualified immunity defense available under § 1983 for Connecticut constitutional violations

Wilson v. Layne

141 F.3d 111 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 8, 1998

Furthermore, the district court refused to accept the officers’ alternative argument that, at a minimum, they were entitled to qualified immunity because in April 1992, the law was not clearly established that permitting … Talladega City Bd. of Educ., 115 F.3d 821 , 826 n. 4 (11th Cir.1997) (en banc) (explaining that “the law can be ‘clearly established’ for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S.

Polk v. District of Columbia

121 F. Supp. 2d 56 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 26, 2000

When the defendant violates a clearly established right of which a reasonable person should have known, he is not entitled to qualified immunity. … Valdes nevertheless may be entitled to qualified immunity if the right he allegedly violated was not “clearly established” at the time the violation occurred.

Hansen v. Cannon

26 F. App'x 555 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 18, 2001

But qualified immunity does not shield public officials from discovery entirely. … purpose of addressing the issue of qualified immunity.

Joseph J. O'Brien v. City of Grand Rapids William Hegarty Daniel Ostapowicz

23 F.3d 990 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 18, 1994

Plaintiff O’Brien responds that his right to be free from an unreasonable search is clearly established and that defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity because no rational officer would have concluded that exigent … To determine whether qualified immunity protects Hegarty and Ostapowicz,' we must inquire: 1) whether O’Brien identified a clearly established right alleged to have been violated; and 2) whether a reasonable police officer

Felders v. Malcom

755 F.3d 870 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 20, 2014

to qualified immunity.” … ) -26- violated clearly established law. Malcom therefore cannot show that no factual disputes stand between him and qualified immunity.

Daniella Slater v. Shannon Deasey

943 F.3d 898 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 3, 2019

Under the qualified immunity standards that have been clearly established by the Supreme Court, the district court’s dismissal of this action should have been affirmed. … The first of these rules is the more general principle— applicable to all qualified immunity cases—“that clearly established law should not be defined at a high level of generality.” White, 137 S.

James Haynes Camarillo v. Daniel J. McCarthy Director

998 F.2d 638 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 1, 1993

The defense of qualified immunity was not waived. See id. II. … Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages, unless the official’s conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which