Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters1851

10,000+ results

2.56s

  • Donald Gravelet-Blondin v. Sgt Jeff Shelton

    728 F.3d 1086 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 6, 2013

    Qualified Immunity Even so, Sgt. Shelton is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … The court granted qualified immunity, however, finding that the law in 2004 was not sufficiently well-established to have alerted officers that this use of force was unconstitutional.

    Cited 233 timesPublished
  • Kaminsky v. Rosenblum

    929 F.2d 922 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 9, 1991

    DISCUSSION I Doctrine of Qualified Immunity 10 The doctrine of qualified immunity evolved as a balance between the need, on one hand, to hold responsible public officials exercising their power in a wholly unjustified manner … Contrary to appellants' contention, the district court did not stop after addressing only the threshold issue of whether the law was clearly established.

    Cited 65 timesPublished
  • Raby v. Baptist Medical Center

    21 F. Supp. 2d 1341 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Sep 9, 1998

    An official is entitled to qualified immunity if he is performing discretionary functions and his actions do “‘not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Therefore, Mangum’s actions violated clearly established Eleventh Circuit precedent.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Beatrice 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 timesPublished
  • Haney v. Monsky Ex Rel. Zager

    311 S.W.3d 235 · Kentucky Supreme Court · May 7, 2010

    Qualified Official Immunity As this Court thoroughly explained in Yanero v. … Qualified official immunity applies only where the act performed by the official or employee is one that is discretionary in nature. Id.

    Cited 102 timesPublished
  • Bakutis v. Dean

    129 F.4th 299 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 25, 2025

    But ultimately, qualified immunity was preserved because it was not clearly established whether the use of force was reasonable in response to a call claiming a child could be physically ill. … A panel of this court found that the officers violated the Constitution but granted qualified immunity because the violation was not clearly established. Linicomn, 902 F.3d at 537, 539–40.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Higgins v. Town of Concord

    246 F. Supp. 3d 502 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 31, 2017

    The Court cannot determine whether Hodges and Whelan are entitled to qualified immunity at this stage. The defendants argue ' that Hodges and Whelan are entitled to qualified immunity on Counts One and Two. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 , 129 S.Ct. 808 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) ("The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar ‘as their conduct does not violate clearly established

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Benavides v. Nunez

    Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 16, 2025

    Qualified immunity shields an officer from liability if his “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Pearson v. … To overcome qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Prentzel v. State, Department of Public Safety

    169 P.3d 573 · Alaska Supreme Court · Sep 14, 2007

    Under federal law governing constitutional claims brought under § 1988, "a law enforcement officer is entitled to qualified immunity if, in light of clearly established law and the information available to the officer at … To defeat the troopers' claim of qualified immunity, Prentzel must instead show that the troopers' warrantless arrest amounted to a violation of the Fourth Amendment under clearly established federal law governing that amendment's

    Cited 44 timesPublished
  • Harris County, Texas G. Young D. Gehring and J. Cavitt v. Shirley Nagel, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Joel Don Casey

    Texas 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 timesPublished
  • Duckett 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 timesPublished
  • AerSale, Inc. v. The City of Roswell, New Mexico

    District Court, D. New Mexico · Nov 25, 2024

    However, this is precisely the “high level of generality” at which “clearly established” may not be defined for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis. … Christopher is entitled to qualified immunity on AerSale’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims based on the absence of clearly established law, it necessarily follows that he is also entitled to qualified immunity on

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Seal Tite Corp. v. Bressi

    312 N.J. Super. 532 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 19, 1998

    could be afforded on the basis of qualified, rather than absolute, privilege or immunity. … The individual defendants are entitled at least to the protection of qualified immunity, even if the absolute immunity afforded for legislative acts is deemed inapplicable.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Rich v. United States

    158 F. Supp. 2d 619 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 13, 2001

    “Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages to the extent that ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … To obtain qualified immunity, Defendants must establish that in light of this clearly established law, the agents reasonably could have believed that the search of Plaintiffs’ home was lawful.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Stovall v. McAtee

    35 F. Supp. 2d 1125 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 24, 1997

    In denying defendant’s qualified immunity motion, the district court concluded that Thomas v. Pate had clearly established the right at issue. This reliance was misplaced. As noted above, Thomas v. … When a defense of qualified immunity is raised, the plaintiff has the burden of showing that the right he invokes was “clearly established” at the relevant time with sufficient specificity under the circumstances.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Anthony C. Greene v. Jack Barber, Edward Hillyer, Victor Gillis, William Hegarty, and the City of Grand Rapids, Michigan

    310 F.3d 889 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 8, 2002

    Qualified Immunity for the Arrest Mr. … “If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.”

    Cited 909 timesPublished
  • Hardy v. Rabie

    Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 4, 2025

    To overcome qualified immunity, a right must be clearly established such that “a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.” Truman, 1 F.4th at 1235 (citation omitted). … In my view, Deputy DeHerrera’s alleged violation of the Constitution wouldn’t have been clearly established; and the absence of a clearly established violation would trigger qualified immunity.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Thomas Wilkinson, Benjamin Wilkinson, by Next Friend Thomas Wilkinson and Jonathan Wiegand v. Caroline S. Russell, James Adams and Gerald Jeffords

    182 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
  • Douglas v. Condon

    419 F.3d 1097 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 16, 2005

    The district court found that no clearly established Fourth Amendment right had been violated by ADA Dobbs in the search of Douglas’s prescription records and that qualified immunity applied. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

    Cited 36 timesPublished
  • Farrington v. Poole

    Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 6, 2026

    Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages if ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Second, the doctrine of qualified immunity required the district court to apply only clearly established law to the defendants’ conduct.

    Cited 0 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.