Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
2.15s
Aaron Salter v. City of Detroit, Mich.
133 F.4th 527 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 21, 2025
A public official is entitled to qualified immunity at summary judgment when, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the challenged conduct did not violate “clearly established” constitutional rights … Clearly Established Law on Withholding Material Evidence Even if he violated Salter’s rights under Brady, Detective Olsen contends that he is still entitled to qualified immunity because, at the time, it was not clearly
Cited 8 timesPublishedR. Scott Sexton v. Ronald Martin
210 F.3d 905 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 19, 2000
established for purposes of the Harlow qualified immunity standard." … In Martin's supplementary motion for summary judgment, Martin argues in the qualified immunity portion of this brief that he "is entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that he could be guilty
Cited 2 timesPublished356 F. Supp. 2d 839 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 4, 2005
Qualified Immunity: Federal Law Qualified immunity protects “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Rankin and Radde contend they are entitled to qualified immunity because they violated no clearly established constitutional right of which they were or reasonably should have been aware.
Cited 15 timesPublishedLion Boulos, Individually and Doing Business as Abco Food Stores v. Richard D. Wilson
834 F.2d 504 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 23, 1987
Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” … To rule on the claim, the court must decide whether the inspections violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known” Harlow, supra, 102 S.Ct. at 2738 .
Overruled by Carswell v. Camp, 37 F.4th 1062 (2022)Cited 171 timesPublishedJoe Marsh, Leroy Owens v. Butler County, Alabama, the Butler County Commission
268 F.3d 1014 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 26, 2001
“Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” Mitchell v. … We also do not take into account the debatable nature of this most basic question when we write about whether the law was clearly established for the purposes of qualified immunity. .
Overruled in part, on other grounds by Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009)Cited 604 timesPublished19 F.3d 557 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 21, 1994
The court did not use the term “qualified immunity,” nor did it suggest that the law was not clearly established. Furthermore, the court submitted a special interrogatory to the jury. … The law, as established by the Anderson case in the Supreme Court, is that qualified immunity — inquiry for the qualified immunity is whether the objective, albeit, fact-specific question, whether a reasonable official could
Cited 9 timesPublishedDuckett v. City of Cedar Park, Texas
950 F.2d 272 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 10, 1992
The Supreme Court held that the first inquiry in the examination of a defendant's claim of qualified immunity is whether the plaintiff "allege[d] the violation of a clearly established constitutional right." … . § 1983 , holding that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because defendants "could not reasonably be charged with knowledge that they might be violating a clearly established right of the Plaintiff."
Cited 72 timesPublishedMichael J. Bakalis v. Jenni Golembeski Mark R. Stephens Merrill Becker James Durkin
35 F.3d 318 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 8, 1994
However, a plaintiff may not escape the doctrine of qualified immunity by alleging violation of a clearly established, but very broad, constitutional right. [0]ur cases establish that the right the official is alleged to … Walker, 812 F.2d 304, 307-08 (7th Cir.1987), we explained: [The Harlow qualified immunity] test would have little bite if a right “clearly established” at any level of generality could survive it.
Cited 58 timesPublishedBeatrice Luna v. Texas Department of Pub Sf
765 F.3d 531 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 28, 2014
Discussion The doctrine of qualified immunity shields “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … Clearly Established Law Under the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, plaintiffs must show that Mullenix’s actions violated a constitutional right that was sufficiently clearly established.
Cited 4 timesPublished847 F. Supp. 163 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 24, 1994
The Supreme Court established the current qualified immunity analysis in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). … As discussed, the second half of the two-part qualified immunity analysis focuses on whether or not the constitutional rights were clearly established at the time of the violation, such that defendants knew or should have
Cited 15 timesPublished262 Ga. App. 182 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jul 8, 2003
“Government officials, including police officers, are entitled to immunity from personal liability under 42 USC § 1983 if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … S. 635, 640 (107 SC 3034, 97 LE2d 523) (1987). 5 The burden on the plaintiff to show a clearly established right is a *184 strenuous one. 6 And “if the law is not clearly established, the officer is entitled to summary judgment
Cited 6 timesPublished955 F. Supp. 642 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Feb 28, 1997
The Court finds that the right to prompt medical attention for a serious medical need was clearly established in 1994. … Summary judgment based upon qualified immunity is inappropriate “where what actually happened ... need[s] to be resolved by the trier of fact in order to reach a decision on the applicability of qualified immunity.”
Cited 8 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 8, 2026
or statutory right; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.’” … Stopping there, the district court also did not consider the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity analysis.
Cited 0 timesPublished370 F.3d 1028 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 3, 2004
“In an action under section 1983, individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity unless it is demonstrated that their alleged conduct violated clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … We also review the legal issues surrounding the grant of qualified immunity de novo. Id.
Cited 138 timesPublishedTexas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Aug 25, 2011
Identification of the clearly established law is not a question of fact to be established by evidence. … This would not be qualified immunity, but absolute immunity.
Cited 0 timesPublished214 F. Supp. 2d 69 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 26, 2002
was clearly established at the time of the [official’s] alleged violation.” … If courts deciding § 1983 suits on the basis of qualified immunity were to tackle the difficult substantive law, then the law would become 'clearly established' so that officers presented with similar factual scenarios in
Cited 2 timesPublishedRustgi v. Board of County Commissioners of County of Weld, Colorado
District Court, D. Colorado · Apr 29, 2021
Because Rustgi possessed a clearly established constitutional right and has alleged a constitutional violation by Sheriff Reams, dismissal is inappropriate on qualified immunity grounds. See Keith v. … was clearly established.
Cited 0 timesUnknown188 F. Supp. 3d 866 · District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · May 26, 2016
She is entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the plaintiff plausibly pleads that she violated a constitutional right, and (2) the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … Qualified immunity—validity of warrant Turning to qualified immunity, again, to overcome qualified immunity the plaintiff must plausibly allege that the defendants violated a constitutional right, and that the right was clearly
Cited 1 timesPublished574 F.3d 1169 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 30, 2009
It then considered whether the Officers could “conduct the probation search without suspicion of wrongdoing,” granting immunity because it had not been clearly established “what level of suspicion, if any, was required prior … established one way or another — denied qualified immunity on the detention claim.
Overruled in part by United States v. King, 687 F.3d 1189 (2012)Cited 20 timesPublished182 F.3d 89 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 17, 1999
Under the Vermont qualified immunity standard, then, Russell is entitled to qualified immunity in her communications with Shanley unless Russell reasonably should have known that those communications violated clearly established … In the event that this threshold determination reveals a possible constitutional violation, “ ‘[a] qualified immunity defense is established if (a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it
Cited 140 timesPublished
Ask Donna