Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.35s
27 F.3d 1432 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 27, 1994
Bagley, 988 F.2d 868 (9th Cir.1993), in which we employed “a two-part analysis” to determine whether the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity: “1) Was the law governing the official's conduct clearly established … 's first question dictates our decision on qualified immunity, and not only when we decide that the law is not clearly established.
Cited 368 timesPublished710 F. Supp. 1080 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Jan 5, 1989
Under the objective standard, the immunity defense is unavailable to the defendant “if the constitutional right allegedly infringed by [him] was clearly established at the time of [his] challenged conduct, if [he] knew or … The question becomes, therefore, whether he forfeited that immunity if he engaged in conduct which he knew or should have known would infringe a “clearly established” constitutional right enjoyed by the plaintiff.
Cited 3 timesPublished589 F.3d 736 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 28, 2009
was clearly established." … In evaluating Nurse Smith’s motion to dismiss and her claim to qualified immunity, the district court found that "the general Eighth Amendment right at issue was clearly estab- lished at the time of the events alleged in
Cited 263 timesPublished1 F. Supp. 2d 680 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Apr 2, 1998
A claim of qualified immunity depends on whether the defendant’s conduct violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known. Id. at 638-40 ; Harlow v. … To defeat a motion for summary judgment based on a claim of qualified immunity in the Sixth Circuit, a plaintiff must establish two things.
Cited 1 timesPublished142 F. Supp. 3d 793 · District Court, N.D. Iowa · Nov 3, 2015
Qualified Immunity For Excessive Force 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 … If’deciding the issue of qualified immunity now, I would resolve that the law is clearly established, based on the Fifth,' Seventh, Eighth,' Ninth, and Tenth Circuit cases cited in Section III(C) of* this Opinion and Order
Cited 5 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 6, 2026
Qualified Immunity When considering a qualified immunity defense, we must determine whether the defendant violated plaintiff’s constitutional rights and, if so, whether defendant violated clearly established law. … And it is clearly established. Good v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 30, 2023
In the qualified immunity context, “[t]he sources of clearly established law to be considered are limited. … Here, the Court proceeds directly to the clearly established step of the qualified immunity analysis: whether it was clearly established at the time of Vaughn’s encounter with the deputies that the
Cited 0 timesUnknown948 F.2d 397 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 27, 1991
If Bennett was attempting to suppress Hansen’s speech on the basis of its content, then he violated clearly established rights and is not entitled to qualified immunity. Collinson v. … If, on the other hand, he was enforcing an appropriately limited time, place, and manner restriction, then he did not violate clearly established rights, Jones v.
Cited 17 timesPublishedRicky Tatum v. Willie Robinson
858 F.3d 544 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 30, 2017
The district court denied Robinson qualified immunity. Robinson appeals. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, see Mitchell v. … To overcome an assertion of qualified immunity, a plaintiff “must present sufficient facts to show not only (1) that the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right, but also (2) that the right was clearly established
Cited 61 timesPublished346 F.3d 1157 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 16, 2003
-3- The district court announced the proper standard for addressing qualified immunity at the Rule 12(b)(6) stage – whether immunity is established on the face of the … However, we take this opportunity to suggest that district courts clearly address the qualified immunity issue."), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 946 (1993).
Cited 1 timesPublished584 F.3d 1304 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Oct 27, 2009
Kobayashi, 581 F.3d 1304, 1307 (11th Cir.2009). 2 “Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.” Pearson, 129 S.Ct. at 816 (citing Anderson v. … An officer using force in the course of a seizure of a citizen is entitled to qualified immunity unless the level of force violated clearly established Fourth Amendment law.
Cited 324 timesPublished877 F.3d 1253 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 19, 2017
“Clearly Established” Law Having concluded that Deputy Pardinas’s conduct violated a constitutional right, the next question in our qualified immunity analysis is whether that constitutional right was “clearly established … Brand’s right to bodily privacy was clearly established. We affirm the District Court’s denial of qualified immunity on the Brands’ bodily-privacy claim. 17 IV.
Cited 6 timesPublished519 F. Supp. 2d 1110 · District Court, D. Montana · Sep 28, 2007
This examination, in turn, invokes the Court’s obligation to address and resolve the threshold issue of Defendants’ claim of qualified immunity. 6 Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity is ‘an entitlement not to stand trial … Finally, “[i]f the law did not put the [employer] on notice that his conduct would be clearly unlawful, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is appropriate.”
Cited 2 timesPublishedMeas v. City and County of San Francisco
681 F. Supp. 2d 1128 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 9, 2010
A court considering a claim of qualified immunity must determine whether the plaintiff has alleged the deprivation of an actual constitutional right and whether such right was clearly established such that it would be clear … Here, defendants argue that the officers are entitled to qualified immunity as to the false arrest and malicious prosecution claims because none of their actions violated clearly established law.
Cited 13 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 3, 2025
In denying qualified immunity, the district court resolved the legal question of whether Pratt’s conduct violated clearly established law, giving us the opportunity to review immediately its resolution of that issue. … In this case, we can begin and end our analysis with the second step of the qualified- immunity analysis, because we hold that Pratt’s conduct did not violate McNair’s clearly established rights.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished634 F. Supp. 2d 220 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jul 13, 2009
“In administering the [Supreme] Court’s test, this circuit has tended to list separately the two sub-parts of the ‘clearly established’ prong along with the first prong and, as a result, has articulated the qualified immunity … Defendants offer what is clearly a template ("boiler plate”) summary of the law on qualified immunity that is outdated- and fails to apply the qualified immunity analysis to the facts of this case adequately.
Cited 14 timesPublished322 F. Supp. 2d 702 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Jun 23, 2004
If the answer to that threshold question is yes, the officer may still be entitled to qualified immunity if the right was not clearly established at the time of the events at issue. Clem v. … established now, and was clearly established in 1983.
Cited 6 timesPublished472 F. Supp. 2d 16 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 30, 2007
third prongs [of the qualified immunity test].” 469 F.3d at 168. … The plaintiff argues that the defendants were on notice that their strip search policy violated clearly established law because “closely analogous cases” clearly established that policies permitting strip searches conducted
Cited 2 timesPublished542 F. Supp. 2d 583 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Oct 11, 2007
Qualified Immunity The Officers assert they are entitled to qualified immunity. … In order to establish the defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity, a plaintiff must satisfy a two-part test: (1) under existing law, the plaintiff must allege a violation of an actual, clearly established constitutional
Cited 8 timesPublishedLenell Geter v. James Fortenberry
882 F.2d 167 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 5, 1989
We examine the plaintiffs’ factual allegations only to determine whether they would be sufficient, if proven, to make out a violation of clearly-established law. 3 II. … However, in Geter I we held that these same allegations were substantial enough to “remove the cloak of qualified immunity”: “[A] police officer cannot avail himself of a qualified immunity defense if he procures false identification
Cited 36 timesPublished
Ask Donna