Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.63s
199 F. Supp. 3d 1224 · District Court, D. Nebraska · Aug 9, 2016
were clearly established at the time it was taken. … But even assuming that Whitten has alleged a violation of his constitutional right, the contours of that right were not clearly established. *1233 The Court evaluates the defense of qualified immunity from the perspective
Cited 6 timesPublishedAlhadji Bayon v. Marshall Berkebile
29 F.4th 850 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 28, 2022
The officers moved for summary judgment, asserting that their use of force was justified and that, in any event, they were entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct did not violate clearly established law. … The officers assert they are entitled to qualified immunity because “no clearly established law put them on notice that their con- 16 duct would violate Bayon’s rights.”
Cited 38 timesPublishedSaved Magazine v. Spokane Police Department
19 F.4th 1193 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 9, 2021
The panel held that Officer Doe was entitled to qualified immunity under the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, which asks whether the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of defendant’s … Plaintiffs first argue that the district court erred in concluding that Officer Doe was entitled to qualified immunity because the law underpinning the alleged First Amendment violation was clearly established.
Cited 31 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · Jul 11, 2025
Aug. 29, 2024) (per curiam) (applying the any-crime rule post-Chiaverini to evaluate an officer’s pre-Chiaverini actions “[b]ecause the qualified immunity analysis focuses on whether the law was clearly established at … Qualified immunity “shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Mullenix v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 20, 2021
determining entitlement to qualified immunity” and teaches officials how to govern their conduct in the future. … Dep’t of Corr., 642 F.3d 163, 176 (3d Cir. 2011) (burden of establishing qualified immunity falls to official claiming it as defense (citing Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 819 (1982)).
Cited 0 timesUnknown621 F.3d 1196 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 14, 2010
On review of a denial of a motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity, we review de novo whether governing law was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. See Mabe v. … [3] A court, when deciding whether there has been a viola- tion of a “clearly established right” for qualified immunity, must strike the proper balance in defining that right. In Ander- son v.
Cited 150 timesPublishedDollar Loan Center of SD v. Bret Afdahl
933 F.3d 1019 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 14, 2019
“Absent either a clearly established right or a constitutional violation, qualified immunity applies.” Dillard v. … In a qualified immunity analysis, “a right is ‘clearly established’ if the ‘contours of the right [are] sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.’”
Cited 11 timesPublished240 F. Supp. 3d 426 · District Court, D. South Carolina · Mar 8, 2017
Qualified Immunity Government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct.
Cited 17 timesPublished38 F.4th 1282 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 11, 2022
The district court nonetheless held that Officer Yehia was entitled to qualified immunity because Mr. Irizarry had not shown a violation of clearly established law. … Irizarry has shown a violation of clearly established law. Officer Yehia is not entitled to qualified immunity. III.
Cited 61 timesPublishedPooler v. Hempstead Police Department
897 F. Supp. 2d 12 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 14, 2012
that preclude summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. 1. … Tollaksen, 257 Fed.Appx. 400, 401 (2d Cir.2007) (explaining that government officers “are protected by qualified immunity if their actions do not violate clearly established law, or it was objectively reasonable for them
Cited 12 timesPublishedKaren Bonitz v. Michael v. Fair, Karen Bonitz v. Michael v. Fair, Appeal of William Shaughnessy
804 F.2d 164 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 3, 1986
When a government official asserts a defense of qualified immunity, his argument is that, even assuming the plaintiff’s allegations are true, he is immune from suit because the law allegedly violated was not clearly established … ” were clearly established.
Overruled on other grounds by Unwin v. Campbell, 863 F.2d 124 (1988)Cited 98 timesPublished77 F. Supp. 3d 1154 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Dec 24, 2014
established prong of the qualified immunity analysis. … Clearly Established Rights in the Qualified Immunity Analysis.
Cited 71 timesPublishedBarbara Donald v. Tyler Norris
131 F.4th 1255 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 13, 2025
We need address only whether Burrell’s right to some other treatment was clearly established because that answer resolves the qualified-immunity question. … Indeed, the formulation from the Hill dicta would eliminate the “clearly established” part of the qualified-immunity analysis as we know it.
Cited 16 timesPublished672 F.3d 1126 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 9, 2012
We further hold that Heiman and Neil did not violate clearly established rights by arresting Conner. … HEIMAN 2757 clearly established, the Supreme Court has specified that the application of that requirement must be clearly established in a particularized context. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 202.
Cited 55 timesPublishedStudent Services for Lesbians/Gays & Friends v. Texas Tech University
635 F. Supp. 776 · District Court, N.D. Texas · May 28, 1986
Qualified Immunity For Defendants Not Given Absolute Immunity First, this defense of qualified immunity is asserted principally on behalf of those defendants who were sued in an individual capacity. … The Law as to the Plaintiff Organization Was Clearly Established In Some Circuits The defense of qualified immunity is not an absolute bar to damages against persons who are sued also in their individual capacity.
Cited 1 timesPublishedAndrea Miller v. Woodston Maddox
866 F.3d 386 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 3, 2017
Lastly, we address Maddox’s argument that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity for their actions unless (1) the plaintiff has established a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) the right at issue was clearly established at time of the incident
Cited 100 timesPublished951 S.W.2d 25 · Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Jul 10, 1997
claims of qualified immunity in section 1983 cases.” … Flores and Manning focus their arguments on the objective reasonableness of their actions to establish their entitlement to qualified immunity.
Cited 18 timesPublished335 F.3d 889 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 9, 2003
a complaining witness in presenting a judge with a supporting affidavit to establish probable cause for an arrest. … We must now recognize that beyond those functions historically recognized as absolutely immune at common law, qualified and only qualified immunity exists.
Overruled on other grounds by Sanchez v. Mayorkas, 593 U.S. 409 (2021)Cited 1,451 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · Aug 20, 2021
Supp. 3d 636, 664-65 (E.D.N.Y. 2017) (arresting officer not entitled to qualified immunity despite officer’s testimony he merely gave arrestee a “bear hug” in light of plaintiff’s testimony that he was placed in a chokehold … Ohio 2004) (stating that an officer who “flipped [plaintiff] to the ground and choked him two times, the second time while [plaintiff] was not resisting . . . violat[ed] . . . clearly established law”).
Cited 0 timesUnknown879 F. Supp. 2d 472 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 30, 2011
The Housleys bear the burden of proving the violation of a constitutional right, but the Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity if they prove that the right was not clearly established. See Wilson v. … Finally, the Court will not revisit the qualified immunity issue at trial.
Cited 13 timesPublished
Ask Donna