Case law

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.

Rohrbough v. Hall

586 F.3d 582 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 9, 2009

After careful consideration, we conclude that the constitutional right involved in this case was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … In other words, although “[t]he right to be free from excessive force is a clearly established right,” Guite v.

Frances A. Warner v. John A. Graham, Duainne S. Bourcy, Wayne J. Anderson and Weldee Baetsch

845 F.2d 179 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 27, 1988

The court then denied the supervisors’ motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity concluding that Warner’s right to use peyote was clearly established at the time of her termination and that the supervisors should … Even if we were to conclude that Warner had a clearly established constitutional right to use peyote, it is insufficient for immunity purposes to determine only if a “clearly established” constitutional right exists.

Ulysse v. Stokes

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2021

As a result, Ulysse does not point to a case clearly establishing that Al-Hinawi’s alleged conduct here violated federal law, which entitles to Officer to qualified immunity. Ulysse turns to Taylor v. … By comparison to the objective qualified immunity test under § 1983, Hargraves v. D.C., 134 F.

Carrillo v. State

169 Ariz. 126 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Sep 5, 1991

immunity. … In the answer, defendants asserted a defense of qualified immunity, which is available only to a government official sued in a personal rather than official capacity.

Sigman v. Town Of Chapel Hill

161 F.3d 782 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 2, 1998

immunity. 16 Police officers are protected by qualified immunity when performing their duties within the scope of their employment insofar as their conduct does not breach "clearly established statutory or constitutional … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 , (1982) (qualified immunity exists when "conduct does not violate clearly established ... constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

Kargbo v. Brown, et al.

2013 DNH 170 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Dec 13, 2013

Nor can it conclude that they are entitled to the protections afforded by qualified immunity. … Aug. 5 , 2008) (noting that the malicious and sadistic use of force is always violative of clearly established law, so qualified immunity is rarely available when the parties genuinely dispute whether such force was applied

Jason Mucha v. Jutiki Jackson

786 F.3d 1064 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 27, 2015

They rely for their defense of qualified immunity on Wisconsin’s emergency detention statute, Wis. … They were not violating any clearly established law, whether constitutional or statutory, federal or state.

Mitchell v. Miller

790 F.3d 73 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jun 15, 2015

Clearly Established Mitchell has the burden of demonstrating that as of April 10, 2011, the time of the alleged violation, the law was clearly established such that a reasonable officer in Miller's shoes would … The Supreme Court "express[ed] no view as to the correctness of the Court of Appeals' decision on the constitutional question," but held that the right was not clearly established, and Brosseau was entitled to qualified

Kokesh v. Curlee

14 F.4th 382 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 21, 2021

This is true “even when . . . a court decides only the clearly-established prong of the [qualified immunity] standard.” Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650, 657 (2014). … B Turning to qualified immunity’s second inquiry—whether a constitutional right was clearly established—we did more in Turner than simply declare that the right to record police exists.

Solomon v. Auburn Hills Police

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 10, 2004

Kiefer, 310 F.3d 937, 944 (6th Cir. 2002) (recognizing that “right to be free from ‘excessively forceful handcuffing’ is a clearly established right for qualified immunity purposes”); Turek v. … Constitutional Right Clearly Established Once a potential violation of a plaintiff’s constitutional right has been established, we next decide whether that right was clearly established.

Daniel J. Peterson, D/B/A Chiarello Investments, D/B/A Home Equity lending.com v. County Line, Inc. James Houchins and Greg A. Weithoner

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 7, 2008

He asserted that Hayes-Pupko had to overcome his assertion of qualified immunity by proving that he (1) violated her clearly established rights and (2) acted unreasonably or in bad faith in doing so. … Discussion “A government official performing discretionary functions is entitled to qualified immunity unless his conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Robinson v. Bibb

840 F.2d 349 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 26, 1988

The question in this case is when does a judicial decision operate to strip a public official of good faith immunity by becoming “clearly established” law. … A police officer’s immunity is qualified, not absolute.

Rosa Cuevas v. City of Tulare

107 F.4th 894 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 10, 2024

III Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability under § 1983 “unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established … Accordingly, the officers are entitled to qualified immunity. AFFIRMED.

Vasquez v. Maloney

990 F.3d 232 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 4, 2021

immunity because clearly established law prohibits detaining and frisking a person without a warrant, probable cause, or reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. … 2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”

Africa v. City of Philadelphia

49 F.3d 945 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 6, 1995

If the law is not established clearly when an official acts, he is entitled to qualified immunity because he “could not reasonably be expected, to anticipate subsequent legal developments, nor could he fairly be said to ‘ … qualified immunity.

Wrench Transportation Systems, Inc. v. Bradley

340 F. App'x 812 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 28, 2009

Because we find that Malone's claim does not establish the deprivation of a Constitutional right, we need not determine whether Kennedy and McMahon are entitled to qualified immunity. See Pearson v. … . -, 129 S.Ct. 808, 815-18 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (upholding the two prongs of qualified immunity analysis — that a plaintiff must show a “violation of a constitutional right” and that the right was "clearly established

Ash-har Quraishi v. Deputy Michael Anderson

986 F.3d 831 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 28, 2021

Qualified immunity shields Anderson from civil damages liability if his conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” See Harlow v. … Anderson insists that the law was not clearly established at the time of his alleged misconduct.

Lincoln v. Maketa

880 F.3d 533 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jan 17, 2018

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity protects officials from civil liability as long as they do not “‘violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … City of Albuquerque, 813 F.3d 912, 929 n.9 (10th Cir. 2015) (“A circuit split will not satisfy the clearly established prong of qualified immunity.”).

Hunter Tillis v. Allan H. Brown, Jr.

12 F.4th 1291 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 7, 2021

Brown’s use of deadly force was specifically circumscribed by our clearly established Fourth Amendment precedent. He therefore is not entitled to qualified immunity. A. … But for plaintiffs to overcome the bar of qualified immunity, Brown’s conduct must also have violated clearly established law.