Case law

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

In re: Allen v.

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 8, 1997

clearly established federal rights . … qualified immunity is lost if an official violates clearly established state law.

West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority v. A.B.

234 W. Va. 492 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 31, 2014

Va.Code, 29-12A-1 et seq. is entitled to qualified immunity from personal liability for official acts if the involved conduct did not violate clearly established laws of which a reasonable official would have known. … official’s personal, qualified immunity for discretionary judgments and functions which are neither in violation of a “clearly established law” nor “fraudulent, malicious, or otherwise oppressive.”

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.

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.

Pratt v. State of NH

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · May 6, 1994

established law." … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982) (qualified ______ __________ immunity extends to conduct which "does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known").

Individuals for Responsible Government, Inc. v. Washoe County

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

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.”

Dennis Goddard and Bonnie Goddard v. Pete Urrea, Gene Ford

847 F.2d 765 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 20, 1988

In this case, the first inquiry is whether the Goddards have adequately alleged a violation of a clearly established right thereby warranting denial of summary judgment on immunity grounds. … The factual allegations in this case clearly establish a factual dispute which impacts on the reasonableness of the agents’ conduct.

Blake Stewardson v. Cameron Biggs

43 F.4th 732 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 5, 2022

The court explained that “it is clearly established that officers have a duty to intervene when a realistic opportunity would prevent use of excessive force on handcuffed individuals, individuals who are not or have stopped … It is clearly established that “[a]n officer who is present and fails to intervene to prevent other law enforce- ment officers from infringing the constitutional rights of citi- zens is liable under § 1983 if that officer

Francisco Jose Rivero Pacific Internment Services, a California Corporation v. City and County of San Francisco, and Joseph Surdyka Boyd Stephens

316 F.3d 857 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 20, 2002

Valuable Governmental Benefit Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity only “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … That is, they argue that it was not “clearly established” that the outcome of the Pickering balancing test favored Rivero.

Jonathan Rogers v. M. L. Pendleton, Officer M. G. Vinyard, Officer

249 F.3d 279 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 4, 2001

While a consensus- of cases of persuasive authority may clearly establish a right for qualified *288 immunity purposes, the inverse is also true: if there are no cases of controlling authority in the jurisdiction in question … , and if other appellate federal courts have split on the question of whether an asserted right exists, the right cannot be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes.

Jenness v. Nickerson

637 A.2d 1152 · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Feb 15, 1994

The Officers here violated no clearly-established rights. … The Officers violated no “clearly established” rights.

Buffington v. Baltimore County

913 F.2d 113 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 31, 1990

qualified immunity because their conduct did not violate clearly established constitutional law of which a reasonable officer would have known. … The Buffingtons understandably did not think that the individual defendants had raised the distinct contention that they were entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct did not violate clearly established constitutional

Tina Ray v. Michael Roane

93 F.4th 651 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 22, 2024

We turned then to the question of qualified immunity. … As we explained in Ray, a government official who violates the Constitution might nonetheless be shielded from liability under the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis if “clearly established

Gena Duckworth etc. v. Bart Saracino etc.

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 19, 2007

right allegedly infringed was clearly established”). … The next step in the qualified immunity analysis “is to ask whether the right was clearly established . . . in light of the specific context of the case.” See Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201 (2001).

V.S. ex rel. T.S. v. Muhammad

581 F. Supp. 2d 365 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2008

The claim of qualified immunity on all federal claims Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages when “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … If the case were limited to these facts, the City defendants would seem to have a strong case for qualified immunity under the clearly established and clearly deferential standard of the Second Circuit.

Decoria v. County of Jefferson

333 F. App'x 171 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 20, 2009

Titland is not entitled to qualified immunity if (1) his conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) that right was “clearly established” at the time of the constitutional violation. Saucier v. … We conclude that the alleged constitutional right at issue here was not “clearly established” in 2005, and that Titland is therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

Decoria v. County of Jefferson

333 F. App'x 171 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 20, 2009

Titland is not entitled to qualified immunity if (1) his conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) that right was “clearly established” at the time of the constitutional violation. Saucier v. … We conclude that the alleged constitutional right at issue here was not “clearly established” in 2005, and that Titland is therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

Charles Wade v. Gordon Lewis

13 F.4th 1217 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 17, 2021

Thus, he contends that the law was not clearly established, and the district court erred in denying him qualified immunity. … In reversing the district court’s denial of qualified immunity and analyzing whether there was clearly established law, we distinguished Aldridge.