Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.39s
Frederick Jackson v. City of Madison
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 28, 2026
We reiterate that to defeat qualified immunity, a plaintiff must point us to law that is established clearly enough “that every reasonable official would interpret it to establish the particular rule the plaintiff seeks to … Officers are entitled to qualified immunity unless “(1) they violated a federal stat- utory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’”
Cited 0 timesPublishedArkansas Attorney General Reports · Jan 7, 1993
The court framed the qualified immunity issue as being "whether minor school children suspected of being victims of child abuse had, [at the relevant time] a clearly established right to be free from questioning and visual … The court found no such clearly established right, and found, therefore that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity and were therefore not liable.
Cited 0 timesPublished533 F. Supp. 1153 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 8, 1982
With respect to the second prong, the reasonableness requirement, the court stated that qualified immunity defense is not available where the constitutional right infringed by defendants was clearly established at the time … Applying this to the facts of the case, the Fifth Circuit held that the lower court’s finding of qualified immunity was clearly erroneous because the defendant’s actions were not reasonable.
Cited 4 timesPublished242 N.C. App. 384 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 21, 2015
"The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials from personal liability under § 1983 insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … "In ruling on the defense of qualified immunity we must: (1) identify the specific right allegedly violated; (2) determine whether the right allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of the violation; and (3)
Cited 1 timesPublishedMichael Sack v. City of St. Louis
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 4, 2026
In an interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity, we have jurisdiction to decide “the purely legal issue of whether the facts alleged by the plaintiff are a violation of clearly established law.” … Qualified immunity shields officials from suit under § 1983 if their “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Pearson v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedGregory Samples v. Harris County
900 F.3d 655 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 17, 2018
Our legal inquiry into the availability of qualified immunity fits into a two-step framework. … marshal caselaw asserting to resolve the question of clearly established law.
Cited 27 timesPublished860 F.2d 1199 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 2, 1988
violated clearly established law. … clearly established duty towards plaintiff.
Cited 49 timesPublished770 F.3d 97 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 6, 2014
[and] [t]he second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was clearly established at the time of the violation.” … established rights,” precluding a grant of qualified immunity. 85 F.3d at 67 .
Questioned by Kisembo v. NYS Office of Children & Family Servs., 285 F. Supp. 3d 509 (2018)Cited 434 timesPublished665 F.3d 1063 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 8, 2011
FINN 20857 sonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). … [2] The only remaining question is whether the federal law that the Court of Appeal failed to apply reasonably was clearly established by the Supreme Court at the time of the Court of Appeal’s decision, as AEDPA requires
Cited 43 timesPublishedJohnston v. City of Houston, Tex.
14 F.3d 1056 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 22, 1994
Principles of Qualified Immunity The qualified or "good faith" immunity doctrine was established to reconcile two competing interests. … Whether a government official is entitled to qualified immunity "generally turns on the "objective reasonableness of the action" assessed in light of the legal rules that were "clearly established" at the time
Cited 168 timesPublished868 F.3d 473 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 18, 2017
It asks whether our case law clearly establishes Officer Graham’s justification for the group searches as a legitimate one. Infra at 494-96. But that’s not how qualified immunity works. … To overcome an officer’s request for immunity, the plaintiff must show that the “right” she seeks to vindicate is clearly established, not that the officer’s justification is not clearly established. Wegener v.
Cited 115 timesPublishedMcBride v. Village of Michiana
100 F.3d 457 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 14, 1996
After remand, the defendants then filed a motion for summary judgment, this time seeking dismissal of McBride’s claims on the basis of qualified immunity because of their belief that “there was no clearly established law … S. -, 115 S.Ct. 1400 , 131 L.Ed.2d 288 (1995), this court then stated that the “right of free speech was ‘clearly established’ for qualified immunity purposes.
Cited 23 timesPublishedCourtney Adams v. Blount Cty., Tenn.
946 F.3d 940 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 8, 2020
standard and violated Edwards’s clearly established rights. … Defendant Burns asserts “the defense of qualified immunity, which shields government officials from ‘liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights
Cited 59 timesPublishedTheresa J. HEDGE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF TIPPECANOE, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
890 F.2d 4 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 17, 1989
Following an unsuccessful motion to dismiss, Defendant Gibson’s counsel moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity, asserting that the constitutional rights Hedge alleged were not clearly established at … of qualified immunity.
Cited 40 timesPublished480 F. Supp. 2d 1271 · District Court, D. Kansas · Mar 29, 2007
No Clearly Established Law Even if Mr. … Hunt had established a constitutional violation sufficient to overcome the first prong of qualified immunity, he has not shown that the right was clearly established at the time he was placed in administrative segregation
Cited 3 timesPublishedCiarametaro v. City of Gloucester
87 F.4th 83 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 28, 2023
The district court held that the City Officials were therefore entitled to qualified immunity. … was "clearly established" at the time of the challenged conduct.
Cited 8 timesPublished42 F. App'x 507 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 30, 2002
There are three ways a defendant can establish qualified immunity. See Robison v. Via, 821 F.2d 913, 920-21 (2d *510 Cir.1987). … As explained in Robison , qualified immunity may be warranted where, although the law was clearly established, “there was, at the time of the challenged [conduct], a legitimate unresolved question as to the existence of .
Cited 8 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. California · Jul 3, 2024
No. 32 at 26-27. 12 The defense of qualified immunity protects “government officials . . . from liability 13 for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or 14 … U.S. at 194); Henry A., 678 F.3d at 1000 (qualified immunity analysis 11 requiring (1) determining the contours of the clearly established right at the time of the 12 challenged conduct and (2) examining whether a
Cited 0 timesUnknown361 F. Supp. 3d 577 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Feb 12, 2019
Yet importantly, the well-established, judicially-created 5 defense of qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from civil liability under § 1983"unless their actions violated 'clearly established statutory … qualified immunity from plaintiff's due process claim.
Cited 7 timesPublishedRenalde v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO
807 F. Supp. 668 · District Court, D. Colorado · Dec 1, 1992
A § 1983 defendant enjoys qualified immunity unless he violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … Therefore, this claim, even if cognizable, was not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation and Rathburn, Watts, and Organ are entitled to qualified immunity. VII.
Cited 10 timesPublished
Ask Donna