Case law

Kaufman v. Higgs

697 F.3d 1297 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 23, 2012

“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 of which a reasonable … Accordingly, to defeat an assertion of qualified immunity in a summary judgment motion, a plaintiff must properly allege a deprivation of a constitutional right and must further show that the constitutional right was clearly

Wyno v. Lowndes County

305 Ga. 523 · Supreme Court of Georgia · Feb 18, 2019

As a result, there has developed what has become known as qualified immunity or official immunity for public officials and employees. … a means of varying that immunity by legislative act.

Doe Ex Rel. Doe v. State

200 Ariz. 174 · Arizona Supreme Court · May 30, 2001

The processing of a particular application in accordance with established procedures, however, does not involve the determination of fundamental governmental policy and therefore enjoys only qualified immunity under A.R.S … Second, section 12-820.02.5 accords qualified immunity to the issuance of any license “for which absolute immunity is not provided pursuant to § 12-820.01.”

Burke v. Pitts

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

Qualified immunity “shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … In Tenorio, we affirmed the denial of a summary judgment motion seeking qualified immunity because the evidence supported a violation of clearly established law. 802 F.3d at 1161.

Catherine Gossman v. Dr. David T. Allen Chris Gorman Irv Maze Darryl Owens and Harvey Sloane, Louisville & Jefferson County Board of Health

950 F.2d 338 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 12, 1991

A government official enjoys qualified immunity if his or her conduct does not violate clearly established federal “statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … The court’s only holding directly relating to the “clearly established” issue was that “[t]he legal rights of citizens under the first amendment to the United States Constitution were clearly established at the time plaintiff

Youngbey v. March

676 F.3d 1114 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 17, 2012

They further claim that, even if their actions are determined to be unconstitutional, they are nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate clearly established law. … Conclusion Appellants are entitled to qualified immunity because neither their no-knock entry of appellees’ home nor their nighttime search violated “clearly established law.”

Angie Chesser, A.K.A. Angie Kimball v. Amos Sparks, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Haralson County Commissioner

248 F.3d 1117 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 18, 2000

violation of a clearly established constitutional right." … Evaluating the defense of qualified immunity involves a two step inquiry: first, whether the defendant’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right; and, second, whether a reasonable government official would

Jordan v. Carter

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Nov 4, 2005

With such a sequential approach, the law continues to develop and become more “clearly established” over time. … Clearly Established Right The second stage of the qualified immunity inquiry requires us to determine whether the right we have identified was “‘reasonably well settled at the time of the challenged conduct,’” Mihos

Key v. Grayson

179 F.3d 996 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 9, 1999

Overview The defense of qualified immunity grants government officials engaged in discretionary activities immunity from individual liability for civil damages unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory … established prior to 1996 in order to preclude a finding of qualified immunity.

Mullenix v. Luna

25 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 555 · Supreme Court of the United States · Nov 9, 2015

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct " 'does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.' … In Brosseau , which also involved the shooting of a suspect fleeing by car, the Ninth Circuit denied qualified immunity on the ground that the officer had violated the clearly established rule, set forth in Tennessee v.

Act Up!/Portland v. Bagley

988 F.2d 868 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 24, 1992

II QUALIFIED IMMUNITY We review a district court’s denial of a qualified immunity defense de novo. Baker v. Racansky, 887 F.2d 183, 185 (9th Cir.1989). … When a law enforcement officer asserts qualified immunity from liability for Fourth Amendment violations, the district court must determine whether, in light of clearly established principles governing the conduct in question

Aisenberg v. Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office

325 F. Supp. 2d 1366 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 16, 2004

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects a prosecutor’s discretionary acts that violate no “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … See Gonzalez, 325 F.3d at 1233-34 (qualified immunity requires dismissal of an action if the complaint “fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right”).

Individuals for Responsible Government, Inc. v. Washoe County

522 U.S. 966 · Supreme Court of the United States · Nov 10, 1997

National Black Police Association, Inc. v. Richard W. Velde

712 F.2d 569 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 30, 1983

The liability standard announced in Harlow entitles appellees to qualified immunity on summary judgment unless such clear duties existed. … Prior to Harlow, summary judgment on questions of qualified immunity generally required both subjective and objective determinations.

Wright v. Whiddon

951 F.2d 297 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 14, 1992

“clearly established” legal right. … In order for a right to be clearly established and defeat an official’s claim to qualified immunity, [t]he contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing

Cowboys for Life v. Sampson

983 F. Supp. 2d 1362 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Oct 21, 2013

The doctrine of qualified immunity is well established. … immunity because the plaintiffs “right to be free from a retaliatory investigation [was] not clearly established.”

Vosburgh v. Bourassa

2008 DNH 133 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Aug 5, 2008

So, where this type of constitutional violation is established there is no room for qualified immunity. … Malicious and sadistic use of force is always in violation of clearly established law, so qualified immunity affords no protections to defendants 20  in Eighth Amendment excessive

White v. Lucero

135 F.4th 1213 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 28, 2025

Clearly Established Law Because courts “are free to decide which prong to address first” in the two- prong qualified immunity inquiry, we choose to begin with whether clearly established law exists that applies to … First, “[d]istrict court cases lack the precedential weight necessary to clearly establish the law for qualified immunity purposes.” Crane v. Utah Dep’t of Corr., 15 F.4th 1296, 1306 (10th Cir. 2021).

Francisco v. Long

132 F.3d 42 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Dec 31, 1997

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982) (establishing the qualified immunity defense). … In other words, once the qualified immunity defense is raised, the plaintiff has the burden of identifying a clearly established right, of which a reasonable person would have known, and alleging facts showing the defendant

Green v. Newport

868 F.3d 629 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 22, 2017

Qualified Immunity Framework “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Green has failed to meet the burden of establishing that the frisk violated clearly established law, and we find that Officer Newport is entitled to qualified immunity regarding the frisk. II.