Case law

Phoenician Mediterranean Villa, LLC v. Swope

554 B.R. 747 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 27, 2016

Appellant argues that Trustee Swope is not entitled to qualified immunity because she violated its clearly established rights and because a reasonable Chapter 7 Trustee would have believed that evicting Appellant from the … Appellant has failed to identify any authority establishing that a trustee is not entitled to immunity.

Tarantino v. Baker

825 F.2d 772 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 10, 1987

Baker’s qualified immunity defense. … "Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery."

Higgenbotham v. Connatser

420 F. App'x 466 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 4, 2011

Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 , 129 S.Ct. 808, 816 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (denying qualified immunity when the plaintiff alleges violation of a constitutional right and such violation was objectively unreasonable under clearly … is entitled to qualified immunity.”

Kennedy v. Lehman

328 F. App'x 16 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 6, 2009

A grant of qualified immunity allows public officials to be “shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Be *20 cause the Individual Defendants did not violate a First Amendment right clearly-established as of 2002, we conclude that they are entitled to qualified immunity, and the district court must be reversed.

Arvil Hall v. Jon Shipley, Don Boles, Phillip Nall, and Sgt. Jack Mansfield

932 F.2d 1147 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 8, 1991

The right asserted by Hall was not so clearly established in this circuit as to defeat the officers’ claim of qualified immunity. … did acts which violate clearly established rights.

Arthur Jackson v. W.I. Hollowell

714 F.2d 1372 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 22, 1983

Qualified Immunity Longstanding precedent establishes the appellants’ entitlement to the benefit of the qualified immunity defense previously recognized in Scheuer v. … Although the defendants have failed to demonstrate their entitlement to the protections of qualified immunity, a separate inquiry must be made to determine whether Jackson adequately demonstrated that his clearly established

Tyrone Cameron v. City of Des Moines

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 26, 2026

Officer Meunsaveng has invoked qualified immunity. … See Pearson, 555 U.S. at 236 (noting that courts can analyze qualified immunity by first addressing whether an at-issue right was clearly established).

Oladeinde v. City of Birmingham

963 F.2d 1481 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 24, 1992

Rule 12(b)(6) and Qualified Immunity At this early stage in the proceedings, the Rule 12(b)(6) defense and the qualified-immunity defense become intertwined. … Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). 5 Under the qualified-immunity defense, defendants are immune from liability and even from trial if plaintiffs’ complaint fails to state a violation of “clearly established statutory or constitutional

X-Men Security, Inc. v. Pataki

196 F.3d 56 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 2, 1999

The qualified-immunity doctrine shields “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Thus, when the district court has denied a qualified-immunity motion, its rulings that the plaintiff has sufficiently alleged the violation of a constitutional right and that that right was clearly established at the time

Occupy Nashville v. Haslam

949 F. Supp. 2d 777 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Jun 12, 2013

defenses,” such as absolute immunity and/or qualified immunity. … QUALIFIED IMMUNITY A.

Jonathan Hedgpeth v. Ammar Rahim

893 F.3d 802 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 26, 2018

The court also held that Officer Rahim was entitled to qualified immunity on the excessive- force claim because no clearly established law prohibited the takedown maneuver he allegedly used to effect the arrest. … Even if there is a genuine dispute about the reasonableness of an officer’s use of force, he is protected by qualified immunity unless his force violated clearly established law. See Kisela, 138 S.

Garramone v. Romo

94 F.3d 1446 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 27, 1996

This is hardly the language of a clearly established right. … We hold that Garramone’s right to counsel under the Due Process Clause was not clearly established, and thus Romo and Sanchez are entitled to qualified immunity on that claim.

Hill v. Selsky

487 F. Supp. 2d 340 · District Court, W.D. New York · May 7, 2007

To establish qualified immunity, a defendant must show “either ‘(a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant to believe that his action did not … Oct. 20, 2006) (“an officer’s violation of clearly established state law is not enough to overcome qualified immunity in a § 1983 suit.

Alvarado v. Whitaker

914 F.3d 8 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jan 24, 2019

See id.; see also id. at 22 ("This would be a different case if the evidence clearly established that Castañeda had guilty knowledge[.]"); cf. Negusie v. … I.N.S., 434 F.3d 136, 144 (2d Cir. 2006) (culpability established by awareness). Alvarado also cites several cases that discuss what conduct constitutes "assistance." See Hernandez v.

Cullinan v. Abramson

128 F.3d 301 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 16, 1997

The grounds on which the defendants relied included both absolute immunity and qualified immunity. … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.

Tanner v. Hardy

764 F.2d 1024 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 21, 1985

It is a well established principle that qualified immunity, which is the most in the way of immunity to which the defendants are entitled, see Procunier v. … Navarette, 434 U.S. 555, 561 , 98 S.Ct. 855, 859 , 55 L.Ed.2d 24 (1978) (State prison officials and officers were not entitled to absolute immunity in § 1983 action but were entitled to qualified immunity), is a matter on

White v. Bagshaw

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 13, 2026

Overcoming a claim of qualified immunity requires a plaintiff to show both “[1] that an official violated a constitutional right and [2] that the right was clearly established at the time of the violation.” Doe v. … Bagshaw claims qualified immunity over the supervisor liability claim, so White must again show both a violation of a constitutional right and that the asserted right was clearly established.

Region VII, Mental Health-Mental Retardation Center v. Isaac

523 So. 2d 1013 · Mississippi Supreme Court · Apr 13, 1988

suit as well as the qualified immunity owing to the public officials employed therein. [1] The seminal decision of Pruett v. … Chawla, was protected from liability by the doctrine of sovereign immunity or by the qualified immunity given to public officials acting in a discretionary capacity within the scope of their duties. Dr.

Carmona v. Olvera

126 F.4th 1091 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 28, 2025

“Qualified immunity protects officers from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established [statutory or] constitutional right.” Converse v. City of Kemah, 961 F.3d 771, 774 (5th Cir. 2020) (quoting Mace v. … And, as noted, because Plaintiff fails to allege violation of a constitutional right, we do not reach the second prong of the qualified-immunity test—whether that right was clearly established at the time of the violation

Anastausia Sepulveda v. R. Ramirez, Cresa B. Appleby, Parole Agent Jim Ludwig

967 F.2d 1413 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 26, 1992

We hold that Officer Ludwig was not entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity. At the time of Officer Ludwig’s alleged actions, Ninth Circuit law clearly established Sepulveda’s right to bodily privacy. … Any right she may have in not having a parole officer observe her while she produced a urine sample, however, in my view is not so “clearly established” as to abrogate appellants’ qualified immunity.