Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.06s
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 12, 2025
DISCUSSION Qualified immunity shields government officials, including law enforcement, from liability unless their conduct violates a clearly established right. 15 When assessing qualified immunity, our inquiry is … Existing caselaw clearly establishes and recognizes that right. 31 But Appellants 27 Wilson, 212 F.3d at 789. 28 Id.
Cited 0 timesPublishedTLC Development, Inc. v. Town of Branford
855 F. Supp. 555 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Mar 8, 1994
Town of Elsmere, 771 F.Supp. 646 (D.Del.1991). 3) Qualified Immunity A finding of arbitrariness not only establishes a due process violation but precludes a defense of qualified immunity. … An equal possibility might have been protection of the town’s established merchants 5 but that would not necessarily have also been reflective of a intent to hurt plaintiff in the process.
Cited 6 timesPublished877 F.3d 346 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 11, 2017
The Relevant “Clearly Established Law” Inquiry To defeat Liebel’s qualified immunity defense, the burden is on plaintiffs to demonstrate that the- alleged violation, of their Free Exercise Clause right was “clearly established … Liebel Did Not Violate Clearly Established Law Under this framework, it is clear that Liebel is protected by qualified immunity.
Cited 167 timesPublished984 F.2d 358 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 20, 1993
and that the law was clearly established when the alleged violation occurred.' " Bruning v. … that the defendant's alleged actions violated clearly established law.
Cited 21 timesPublished800 F.3d 1231 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Sep 8, 2015
Cox has failed to satisfy her burden on the clearly- established-law prong of the qualified-immunity standard. … Cox cannot satisfy the clearly-established-law component of the qualified-immunity standard. We must accordingly reverse the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to the Sheriff on Ms.
Cited 341 timesPublished869 F. Supp. 2d 1139 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 19, 2012
. (3) Was the Right Asserted Clearly Established? … clearly established.
Cited 13 timesPublished388 F.3d 578 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 2, 2004
The second step of the qualified immunity analysis requires courts “to ask whether the right was clearly established.” *583 Id. … Specific findings on these questions of fact would have enabled the district court to address the legal issue of qualified immunity through reference to excessive force standards that are clearly established.
Cited 149 timesPublishedBurge v. Pearl River County, Mississippi
103 F. App'x 823 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 15, 2004
Government officials performing discretionary functions are protected from civil liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity if their conduct violates no “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … established” for qualified-immunity purposes.
Cited 2 timesPublishedSantamorena v. Georgia Military College
147 F.3d 1337 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 31, 1998
But still Plaintiff argues that the preexisting law was somehow so clearly established that Defendants should not be protected by qualified immunity. … established for purposes of qualified immunity.
Cited 49 timesPublished38 F.3d 1559 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 2, 1994
Fitzgerald and its Progeny The Supreme Court established the test for qualified immunity in Harlow v. … clearly established constitutional law”’ under Harlow.
Cited 217 timesPublished491 S.W.3d 877 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Apr 12, 2016
A no-evidence motion cannot be used to obtain summary judgment establishing the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … raise the qualified immunity defense by doing nothing more than pleading in good faith that qualified immunity applies.
Cited 19 timesPublished57 F.3d 962 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 13, 1995
Officer Richmond Government officials performing discretionary functions enjoy qualified immunity from civil damage suits if their conduct did *964 not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … We have held that “in order for the law to be clearly established, there must be a Supreme Court or Tenth Circuit decision on point, or the clearly established weight of authority from other courts must have found the law
Cited 41 timesPublished991 F.2d 454 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 14, 1993
immunity. … Thus, we review Foulks’ claim under the clearly established constitutional standard set forth in Estelle .
Cited 13 timesPublished41 F.3d 47 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 21, 1994
A government official has qualified immunity from liability for damages based on his official acts as long as those acts violate no clearly established statutory or constitutional right. Weg v. … The defendant must establish that he had an objectively reasonable belief that his act violated no clearly established rights. Id. Since the district court did not consider this issue, we remand so that it may do so.
Cited 359 timesPublished942 F.3d 126 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 12, 2019
But the court held that the Earley principle had become clearly established “[b]y 2009, and absolutely no later than 2010,” preventing the State Defendants from claiming qualified immunity “for their later conduct.” … Instead, the Court held that qualified immunity protected the State Defendants because the answer to that question had not been clearly established. Id. at 174–77.
Cited 101 timesPublishedBrandon Backe v. Steven LeBlanc
691 F.3d 645 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 16, 2012
A district court’s denial of qualified immunity to public officials is exactly such an order. … Consequently, this court has established a careful procedure under which a district court may defer its qualified immunity ruling if further factual development is necessary to ascertain the availability of that defense.
Cited 319 timesPublishedJeffrey Clark v. Louisville-Jefferson Cnty. Metro Gov't
130 F.4th 571 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 7, 2025
And because the Supreme Court had clearly established Hardin’s Brady rights before 1992, the district court found that Thurman could not invoke qualified immunity for this constitutional violation. … Qualified immunity bars courts from imposing monetary liability on officers under § 1983 unless their conduct violated “clearly established” law. District of Columbia v.
Cited 4 timesPublishedScotia v. Kan. City Bd. of Police Comm'rs
933 F.3d 967 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 12, 2019
Although there need not be “a case directly on point for a right to be clearly established, existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate,” or else “officers are entitled to qualified … Qualified immunity, on the other hand, asks a different question: were the officer’s actions “unreasonable” under clearly established law? See id. at 1125–28. Different questions can produce different answers.
Cited 19 timesPublished622 F.3d 248 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 4, 2010
The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … The ACLU takes issue with the District Court’s decision to skip the “violation prong” of the qualified immunity inquiry and proceed directly to the “clearly established” prong.
Cited 290 timesPublished68 F.3d 331 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 12, 1995
When a public official asserts qualified immunity from liability in a Sec. 1983 action, we must determine whether (1) the law governing the official's conduct was clearly established and (2) whether under that law, an official … Clearly Established Right 32 While the right the official is alleged to have violated must have been "clearly established" in a "particularized" sense, "this is not to say that an official action is protected by qualified
Cited 25 timesPublished
Ask Donna