Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.83s
Charles Mitchell v. Josh Shearrer
729 F.3d 1070 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 10, 2013
Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known … Our second inquiry in considering the denial of qualified immunity is whether the right violated was clearly established. Whether the facts alleged support such a claim is a legal question for the court to decide.
Cited 47 timesPublishedShedlock v. Department of Correction
442 Mass. 844 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Dec 8, 2004
Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 232 (1991) (right must be clearly established “at the time the defendant acted” to overcome defense of qualified immunity). … However, the issue whether a statutory right is “clearly established” for purposes of overcoming qualified immunity is not a matter of counting up the number of decisions that have gone each way and treating as “clearly established
Cited 30 timesPublished676 F. Supp. 2d 1250 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Oct 13, 2009
Clearly Established Law. … Qualified immunity shields state officials from liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.
Cited 11 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · Feb 19, 2021
"Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability for damages if their actions did not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Fleming v. … Clearly, an entitlement to qualified immunity cannot be established by the mere incantation of magic words, purportedly buttressed by endless pages of quotes relating to the doctrine. Arguably, Ms.
Cited 0 timesUnknown699 F.3d 211 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 24, 2012
-1- Plaintiff-Appellee’s clearly established rights. Defendant-Appellant is, therefore, entitled to qualified immunity. … We hold that Hughes’s conduct in this case, even when viewed in the light most favorable to Coollick, did not violate Coollick’s clearly established rights. Hughes is therefore entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 117 timesPublishedBradley Monical v. Christina Towers
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 7, 2020
immunity. … Hammond, 821 F.3d 1085, 1090 (9th Cir. 2016) (for a right “[t]o be clearly established” for purposes of qualified immunity, “a right must be sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedDanny W. TURNER v. Willie MOORE
76 So. 3d 842 · Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · Jul 29, 2011
‘An official is entitled to qualified immunity if he is performing discretionary functions and his actions do “ ‘not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … [’] complaint fails to allege a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.
Cited 2 timesPublished502 N.W.2d 69 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Jun 22, 1993
Qualified Immunity Appellants claim that, even if the trustee’s claims are actionable under section 1983, Pfingsten is entitled to qualified immunity against those claims. … The threshold question is whether Peterson had a clearly established right which Pfingsten violated. We conclude that he did.
Cited 32 timesPublished770 F.3d 196 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 27, 2014
the clearly established law.” … Few issues related to qualified immunity have caused more ink to be spilled than whether a particular right has been clearly established, mainly because courts must calibrate, on a case- by-case basis, how generally or
Cited 68 timesPublished47 F.4th 1139 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 7, 2022
Qualified Immunity Standard of Review “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … The Law is Clearly Established The district court held that the law was clearly established.
Cited 72 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · May 5, 2026
Qualified Immunity ¶25. … Thus, plaintiffs bear the burden to rebut a defense of qualified immunity “by establishing that the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law.” Harris v. Miss.
Cited 0 timesPublishedMarglli Gallego v. Ivette Perez
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 11, 2024
DISCUSSION “Qualified immunity shields public officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time … “[I]f a plaintiff cannot show that the law at issue was clearly established under the first . . . method, that usually means qualified immunity is appropriate.” King v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished518 F.3d 552 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 4, 2008
The court further held that the right Fortner and Scott allegedly violated was clearly established and therefore concluded that Fortner and Scott were not entitled to qualified immunity. … Was the Right Violated Clearly Established? The second question in considering the denial of qualified immunity is whether the right violated was clearly established.
Cited 118 timesPublishedMabry ex rel. T.M. v. Lee County
100 F. Supp. 3d 568 · District Court, N.D. Mississippi · Mar 30, 2015
In order to overcome a claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff is required to demonstrate “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time … Officer Fant is accordingly entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 10 timesPublishedMichael Fenwick v. United States
778 F.3d 133 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 13, 2015
Under the circumstances of this case, we conclude that the deputies violated no clearly established law and are therefore entitled to qualified immunity. *135 I. … Fenwick’s clearly established constitutional rights.” Id. at 225. On appeal, the deputies challenge the district court’s denial of their motion for summary judgment, renewing their assertion of qualified immunity.
Cited 23 timesPublished151 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jul 22, 1998
When a supervisor seeks qualified immunity in a section 1983 action, the "clearly established" prong of the qualified immunity inquiry is satisfied when (1) the subordinate's actions violated a clearly established constitutional … Responding to these allegations, each defendant claims qualified immunity and, because both the rights in question and each defendant's susceptibility to supervisory liability are clearly established, these qualified immunity
Cited 249 timesPublishedArkansas Attorney General Reports · Nov 3, 2005
Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, an individual is immune from suit if he undertook the actions complained of in good faith in the performance of his duties and the acts do not violate any clearly established constitutional … The immunity is "qualified" because it does not apply where the activity is in violation of clearly established law that a reasonable person would have known. Id. ; Robinson v.
Cited 0 timesPublished145 N.C. App. 70 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 17, 2001
They may, however, defend by raising the defense of qualified immunity. Id. … Qualified immunity protects public officials from personal liability for performing official, discretionary functions if the conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable
Cited 31 timesPublishedDavid Roberts v. City of Omaha
723 F.3d 966 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 31, 2013
There is no clearly established law indicating Roberts’s suggested rights applied in the circumstances of this case. The district court should have granted the officers qualified immunity on these claims. … City of Minneapolis, 596 F.3d 465, 482 (8th Cir. 2010) (explaining under “qualified immunity, a county employee may be held personally liable for a constitutional violation only if his own conduct violated a clearly established
Cited 43 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · Sep 30, 2024
Finally, to overcome the defendant’s assertion of qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show that the (7) constitutional right he contends was violated was clearly established. … Mims misapprehends exactly what law must be clearly established for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis.
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna