Case law

Florida Highway Patrol, etc. v. Lashonta Renea Jackson, etc.

Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 23, 2020

We also agree with FHP that, precisely because sovereign immunity includes immunity from suit, entitlement to sovereign immunity should be established as early in the litigation as possible. … where a legal duty has been established.

Hudgins v. City of Ashburn

890 F.2d 396 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 13, 1989

Harlow and Rich instruct that a summary-judgment motion based on qualified immunity also may require determining the applicable law before ascertaining whether or not that law is clearly established. … Rich recognizes two instances where qualified immunity is accorded to government officials: 1) when the law that they allegedly violated is not clearly established, see, e.g., Clark, 840 F.2d at 882-84 ; Muhammad v.

JUNKERT v. Massey

610 F.3d 364 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 21, 2010

Massey is entitled to qualified immunity for his conduct in applying for a search warrant. See Hinnen v. Kelly, 992 F.2d 140, 144 (7th Cir. 1993). In this context, the test for qualified immunity comes from Malley v. … We have never clearly held that an affidavit materially similar to Massey’s failed to establish probable cause.

Lewis v. Walley

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 27, 2026

The district court denied defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings for the Fourth Amendment search claim, thus denying Walley’s defense of qualified immunity (“QI”). … Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of [QI] protects public officials from liability for civil damages ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statu- tory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Perez Ex Rel. Estate of Arango v. Suszczynski

809 F.3d 1213 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 12, 2016

established law, thus entitling him to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity protects officers engaged in discretionary functions from civil liability only if the officers’ actions do “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Tatro v. Kervin

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Dec 1, 1994

Ct. at 536 (qualified immunity shields police ______ officers from suit if "'a reasonable officer could have believed [plaintiff's arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the [arresting … The police _____ _______ officers did not raise a qualified immunity defense and both parties agree that, given the facts of the case, no qualified immunity issue exists.

Randall Brickey v. Robb Hall

828 F.3d 298 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 8, 2016

Qualified immunity shields government officials from personal liability when “their conduct does not violate clearly established . . . rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Hall is therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

George R. Arnott, Sr. v. John Mataya, Greg Connolly

995 F.2d 121 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 28, 1993

The test for qualified immunity is “whether a reasonable officer could have believed [the arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the [arresting] officers possessed.” Anderson v. … (undisputed facts established that Secret Service agents were entitled to qualified immunity). This does not mean, however, that courts may always decide questions of qualified immunity on summary judgment.

Phillip Lucas . v. State of Tennessee Michael E. Collins v. State of Tennessee

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Feb 4, 2004

Qualified immunity is asserted as a defense, and shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Jordan v. State of Tenn.

738 F. Supp. 258 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Jun 7, 1990

If there is no such constitutional duty, then the defendants are protected by qualified immunity since they could not have violated any “clearly established constitutional duty.” See Eugene D. v. … Qualified Immunity Even if this Court were to agree with the Second Circuit that voluntary residents of a state institution are owed a constitutional duty of safe conditions, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity

Erin Lincoln v. City of Colleyville, Texas

874 F.3d 833 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 31, 2017

Although Erin identifies the second step in the qualified immunity analysis, it is not clear that her contention was that the right to be free from excessive force was clearly established in this case. … Accordingly, Erin waived argument as to the clearly established law prong and thus cannot overcome qualified immunity. 92 Regardless, we cannot on this record conclude that Erin 89 See Melear v.

Ross v. Correction Officers John & Jane Does 1-5

610 F. App'x 75 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 20, 2015

Accordingly, defendant Mullings is entitled to qualified immunity. … Because our focus, in analyzing whether qual *77 ified immunity applies, is on whether the right asserted by Ross was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation, we need not address Kingsley's possible implications

Scott Hernandez v. Town of Gilbert

989 F.3d 739 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 4, 2021

immunity where the law was clearly established, but the officer’s conduct was not objectively reasonable. … IV Because Hernandez cannot identify a violation of any “clearly established” right, Officer Gilbert is entitled to qualified immunity.

Gidley et al. v. Oliveri

2009 DNH 094 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Jun 25, 2009

“[T]he second, ‘clearly established’ step of the qualified immunity analysis . . . has two aspects. … Clearly established right “Public officials are . . . entitled to qualified immunity unless the facts establish that their conduct violated a constitutional right that was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the

Jamie Kirkpatrick v. County of Washoe

792 F.3d 1184 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 10, 2015

to qualified immunity on B.W.’s claim. *1193 See United States ex rel. … “Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established

Davis v. Scherer

468 U.S. 183 · Supreme Court of the United States · Aug 16, 1984

It reasoned that proof that an official had violated clearly established constitutional rights was not the “sole way” to overcome the official’s claim of qualified immunity. … Whether an official may prevail in his qualified immunity defense depends upon the “objective reasonableness of [his] conduct as measured by reference to clearly established law.” Ibid.(footnote deleted).

Paige Ray-Cluney v. Charles Palmer

906 F.3d 540 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 9, 2018

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their con- duct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitu- tional rights of which a reasonable … Under the clearly established prong, “the burden is on plaintiffs to demonstrate the alleged violation of their [consti- tutional] right[s] was ‘clearly established.’” Id.

Grantham v. Trickey

21 F.3d 289 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 12, 1994

established" for the purposes of qualified immunity. … balancing test, it can rarely be considered "clearly established" for purposes of the Harlow qualified immunity standard.... 22 ...

Williams v. Consolidated City of Jacksonville

341 F.3d 1261 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 14, 2003

DISCUSSION 12 “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … of his actions was “clearly established.”

Courtney MacKintrush v. Dustin Hodge

987 F.3d 767 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 5, 2021

“A defendant denied summary judgment based on qualified immunity may appeal the purely legal issue of whether the facts alleged support a claim of violation of clearly established law.” Mallak v. … “Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” City of Escondido v. Emmons, 139 S.