Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filters2024

10,000+ results

4.65s

  • Haley Olson v. County of Grant

    127 F.4th 1193 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 10, 2025

    immunity because any constitutional violation was not clearly established. … Though Carpenter violated Olson’s Fourth Amendment rights, the law was not clearly established at the time, thus entitling Carpenter to qualified immunity. A.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Sarah Doe v. Jerald Neveleff

    751 F.3d 383 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 6, 2014

    “[E]valuating qualified immunity is a two-step process, and the burden is on the plaintiff to prove that a government official is not entitled to qualified immunity.” Wyatt v. … Even if we were to construe the Fifth Amendment to extend so far, no established authority at the time of the assaults would have enabled Plaintiffs to overcome qualified immunity.

    Cited 49 timesPublished
  • Nelson v. Correctional Medical Services

    583 F.3d 522 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 2, 2009

    immunity, arguing their actions did not violate any of Nelson’s clearly established constitutional rights. … Qualified immunity may protect government officials from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , but not if their conduct violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

    Cited 141 timesPublished
  • Yeasin v. Durham

    224 F. Supp. 3d 1194 · District Court, D. Kansas · Dec 1, 2016

    plaintiff shows (1) the defendant’s violation of a constitutional right; and (2) that the right the official violated was “clearly established” at the time of the challenged conduct. 35 Accordingly, the qualified immunity … immunity from a claim of a First Amendment violation as such rights were not clearly established); Bell v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Erin Lincoln v. City of Colleyville, Texas

    887 F.3d 190 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 5, 2018

    “[O]fficers are entitled to qualified immunity under [42 U.S.C.] § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time. … It follows that these officers—Meeks, Scott, and Barnes—similarly were not bound by any such clearly established law. The district court correctly granted these officers qualified immunity.

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • Amanda Reich v. City of Elizabethtown, Ky.

    945 F.3d 968 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 19, 2019

    Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages “unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’” … This brings me to the second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis—clearly established law.

    Cited 108 timesPublished
  • Dominique Ramsey v. David Rivard

    110 F.4th 860 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 1, 2024

    Rivard argues that qualified immunity bars the plaintiffs’ unduly suggestive identification claim because they cannot show that Rivard’s actions violated their clearly established rights. (Appellant Br. 49.) … First, Rivard gains no immunity for violations of clearly established law by following the prosecutor’s advice. See Burns v. Reed, 500 U.S. 478, 495 (1991).

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Clark v. Valletta

    Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 6, 2025

    “Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined as the right to be free from” a given constitutional injury. Id. … CONCLUSION In sum, the district court improperly denied qualified immunity to Defendants because there is no clearly established right to specific gender-dysphoria treatments.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Greenwood v. New York

    163 F.3d 119 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 11, 1998

    . § 1983 ; it did so on the ground that the officials had qualified immunity. 1 We disagree with the court’s conclusion that Greenwood’s property right in his clinical staff privileges was not *121 clearly established and … “Even defendants who violate [clearly established] constitutional rights enjoy a qualified immunity that protects them from liability for damages unless it is further demonstrated that their conduct was unreasonable under

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Shemtov Michtavi v. William Scism

    Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 14, 2015

    Appellants appeal that order, and we conclude that they are entitled to qualified immunity because a prisoner’s right to treatment of retrograde ejaculation, infertility, or erectile dysfunction is not clearly established … She also concluded that the Defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity because Eighth Amendment jurisprudence clearly establishes that prison officials may not be indifferent to a serious medical need.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Denieva v. Reyes

    966 F.2d 480 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 5, 1992

    by qualified immunity. … Did DeNieva Identify a Specific Right, and Was it Clearly Established? 21 We can consider the first two prongs of the Romero test together, as both raise the question of Reyes' violation of a clearly established right.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Baker v. Schwarb

    40 F. Supp. 3d 881 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Aug 19, 2014

    Defendants did not violate any of Plaintiffs’ clearly established rights under the Fourth Amendment and are therefore entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. B. … , that right was not clearly established.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • De Smet v. Snyder

    653 F. Supp. 797 · District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Feb 12, 1987

    The plaintiffs, in turn, must overcome the immunity defense by showing that their allegations, if true, did violate constitutional rights clearly established at the time. … of clearly established constitutional rights.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Michalik v. Hermann

    422 F.3d 252 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 18, 2005

    Evaluating qualified immunity is a two-step process. First, we determine whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional or statutory right. See Siegert v. … An officer need only plead his good faith, which then shifts the burden to the plaintiff, who must rebut the defense by establishing that the officer’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law. Id.

    Cited 189 timesPublished
  • Pierce v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Corrections

    284 F. Supp. 2d 811 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 28, 2003

    Of course, the qualified immunity inquiry asks whether the constitutional right advocated by the plaintiff is clearly established, not whether a defendant’s conduct is not clearly established. … The test for whether a right is clearly established was set out by the Supreme Court: “[C]learly established rights, for purpose of qualified immunity, are ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Moran v. State Of Washington

    147 F.3d 839 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 2, 1998

    established" to preclude qualified immunity under Harlow and its progeny. … established" to defeat Senn's assertion of qualified immunity.

    Cited 37 timesPublished
  • Gregory May v. Michael F. Sheahan

    226 F.3d 876 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2000

    Ill Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to a qualified immunity that shields them from damages liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … were clearly established at the time in question.

    Cited 146 timesPublished
  • Inouye v. Kemna

    504 F.3d 705 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 3, 2007

    Qualified immunity from civil suit is available to government officials performing discretionary functions “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … The district court suggests that Kerr did not provide adequate notice because the court there granted qualified immunity, holding that the law was not yet clearly established.

    Cited 97 timesPublished
  • Carico v. Benton, Ireland, & Stovall

    68 F. App'x 632 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 26, 2003

    Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … clearly established.

    Cited 40 timesPublished
  • Grendell v. Gillway

    974 F. Supp. 46 · District Court, D. Maine · Jul 11, 1997

    immunity and, consequently, the question of whether this right was clearly established at the time Gillway acted. … qualified immunity.

    Cited 15 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.