Case law

Timothy Hall v. Blake Navarre

118 F.4th 749 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 3, 2024

Again, our reasoning is limited to the clearly established component of the qualified immunity analysis. … And it is clearly established that Barr is not entitled to qualified immunity because he was “simply following orders.” See Bunkley v.

Castillo v. Day

790 F.3d 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 22, 2015

Both defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting they were entitled to qualified immunity. … of that doctrine to Plaintiffs’ claims is not clearly established.

Good v. Olk-Long

71 F.3d 314 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 8, 1995

This appeal follows. 4 We need only to pass upon the question of qualified immunity. … It is well settled that qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for money damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable official

Quinn v. Young

780 F.3d 998 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 13, 2015

As our qualified-immunity jurisprudence permits us to do, we exercise our discretion to proceed straight to the latter question and resolve this claim on the clearly-established-law prong of our qualified-immunity test … Indeed, the Supreme Court has made clear that reciting the overarching requirement of probable cause does not pass muster in a qualified-immunity clearly-established-law assessment.

Larry Pounds v. David Griepenstroh, Hugh Barclay, and Louis Lubbehusen

970 F.2d 338 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 6, 1992

A right is “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes only where “the contours of the right [are] sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates the right,” and “in … was clearly established.

Gooden v. Howard County, Maryland

954 F.2d 960 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 23, 1992

C. 28 Gooden further argues that the defendants did not act reasonably in light of clearly established law. … Gooden failed to violate a clearly established constitutional right.

Jay T. Brown v. Deputy Constable John Glossip

878 F.2d 871 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 4, 1989

At the time Brown filed his complaint, the law of our Circuit pertaining to the use of excessive force by police officers was clearly established. Shillingford v. … In overcoming the qualified immunity defense, it is not enough for the plaintiff to allege that the government official violated a clearly established right in the generalized sense for that “would ... convert the rule of

Harewood v. Braithwaite

64 F. Supp. 3d 384 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 5, 2014

Qualified Immunity Standards Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Finding a right clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity “do[es] not require a case directly on point, but existing precedent must have placed the ... constitutional question beyond de *400 bate.”

Gordon v. Cargor

District Court, E.D. Michigan · Aug 7, 2025

right underlying his claim is “clearly established”); Mosier v. … Evans, 90 F.4th 541, 546 (6th Cir. 2024) (explaining that for purposes of qualified immunity, a plaintiff may not identify a “clearly established” right at a high level of generality).

Santana v. Cook County Board of Review

700 F. Supp. 2d 1023 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 30, 2010

Commissioners and Board Employees also claim qualified immunity, which shields officials from damages liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … To defeat such asserted qualified immunity a plaintiff must show 6 both (1) the violation of a constitutional right and (2) that the right was “clearly established at the time of the defendant’s misconduct” (concepts that

Spurlock v. Satterfield

167 F.3d 995 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 11, 1999

The district court, however, did review defendant Coarsey's qualified immunity argument, and concluded that solicitation of false testimony for use in prosecuting an individual violates clearly established constitutional … Thus, Satterfield is not entitled to qualified immunity for these alleged acts, because they violated the plaintiffs' clearly established constitutional rights. V.

Devin Jefferson v. George Lias

21 F.4th 74 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 16, 2021

violate clearly established law. … violate “clearly established” law such that he is entitled to qualified immunity.

Travers v. Jones

323 F.3d 1294 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 11, 2003

The law is clearly established that an employer may not demote or discharge a public employee for engaging in protected speech. See Rankin v. … CEO Jones and Chief Wilder are entitled to qualified immunity. REVERSED.

Rooks v. Santiago

District Court, D. Connecticut · Jun 1, 2021

Moreover, qualified immunity “protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages in so far as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Leonard, 282 F.3d 123, 134 (2d Cir. 2002) (qualified immunity requires showing that official violated clearly established law).

Clark v. Wilson

625 F.3d 686 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Nov 22, 2010

. § 1291, we REVERSE the denial of qualified immunity because Clark did not have a clearly established right in 2007 to a predeprivation hearing. I. … Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

John Hugh Gilmore v. City of Minneapolis

837 F.3d 827 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 13, 2016

Fourth Amendment, False Arrest Claim “Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability and the burdens of litigation in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional … qualified immunity on Gilmore’s constitutional claim.

Melodi Navab-Safavi v. Broadcasting Board of Govenors

637 F.3d 311 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 1, 2011

Legal Background Appellant’s motion for dismissal is rooted in the well- established doctrine of qualified immunity. … The Board asserts its qualified immunity, but we are unable to determine without an evidentiary record whether any act it committed in defense of those functions constituted a violation of clearly established rights, or even

Zachary Church v. Bob Anderson

898 F.3d 830 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 3, 2018

We review de novo a decision granting summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. Burton v. St. Louis Bd. of Police Comm’rs, 731 F.3d 784, 791 (8th Cir. 2013). … clearly established at the time of the violation.

Gerald R. Wollin v. Bruce Gondert, Deputy Sheriff, Joseph Seidel, Deputy Sheriff and Jefferson County, Wisconsin

192 F.3d 616 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 2, 1999

“Thus ... a qualified immunity analysis entails a purely objective inquiry to determine whether at the time of the alleged illegal act, the right asserted by the plaintiff was clearly established in the particular factual … Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Randy Cole v. Michael Hunter

935 F.3d 444 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 20, 2019

Garner does not formulate “clearly established law” with the degree of specificity required by the Supreme Court’s decisions on qualified immunity. … Ct. at 1776 (“Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.”); Wilson v.