Case law

Lonegan v. Hasty

436 F. Supp. 2d 419 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 22, 2006

Accordingly, Hasty’s entitlement to qualified immunity depends on whether those rights were clearly established at the time of the alleged violations. 5 See Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . … Qualiñed Immunity To determine whether Hasty is entitled to qualified immunity with respect to plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment claims, the court must now consider whether plaintiffs’ rights were clearly established at the time

Waltman v. Payne

535 F.3d 342 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 10, 2008

clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”1 Qualified immunity protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.”2 Once a government … defense, the plaintiff must show: (1) that he has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right, and (2) that the defendant’s conduct was objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law at

Lenora Daugherty v. Donal Campbell, Alton R. Hesson, Robert W. Starbuck, Funderburk, Rita A. Starbuck, Kevin W. Daniels, Bobby L. Chessor

935 F.2d 780 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 27, 1991

Whether an official may prevail in his qualified immunity defense depends upon the “objective reasonableness of [his] conduct as measured by reference to clearly established law.” … Before the commencement of discovery, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal if the plaintiff fails to state a claim of violation of clearly established law.

Leroy Edward Green v. Camilla Maraio and Angelo J. Ingrassia

722 F.2d 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 7, 1983

The fate of an official with qualified immunity depends upon the circumstances and motivations of his actions, as established by the evidence at trial. Imbler, 424 U.S. at 419 n. 13, 96 S.Ct. at 989 n. 13. … Thus, the complaint itself establishes the circumstances required as a predicate to a finding of qualified immunity and, consequently, there is no reason to require an answer, a hearing or a trial. See Harlow v.

Kisela v. Hughes

584 U.S. 100 · Supreme Court of the United States · Apr 2, 2018

“Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitu- tional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” White v. Pauly, 580 U. … The Ninth Circuit denied qualified immunity to the officer, concluding that his use of force was objectively unreasonable under clearly established law. Id., at 1285– 1286.

Roque v. Harvel

993 F.3d 325 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 1, 2021

those rights were clearly established at the time of the violation “such that the officer was on notice of the unlawfulness of his or her conduct.” 6 The unique nature and purpose of qualified immunity affects … immunity unless his “actions were objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law at the time of the” shooting. 31 The critical question when ascertaining the clearly established law is “whether the

Darby v. Bratch

287 F.3d 673 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 11, 2002

immunity. … The Family and Medical Leave Act creates clearly established statutory rights, including the right to be free of discrimination or retaliation on account of one's exercise of leave rights granted by the statute. 13 Qualified

Carver v. Lehman

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 22, 2008

Even pre-January 1, 2007, unpublished opinions can be cited and considered, for example, in the context of determin- ing whether the law was established in the context of qualified immunity, Prison Legal News v. … 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 person would

Evans v. Headley

566 F. Supp. 1133 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 22, 1983

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2737-40 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) (eliminating subjective part of test for qualified immunity in Bivens actions, Bivens v. … Under these circumstances, it would be difficult to find the defendants had “violate[d] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

Nestor Ayala Serrano v. Cruz Lebron Gonzalez

909 F.2d 8 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jul 18, 1990

In this case, therefore, Lebrón’s qualified immunity claim should fail if, under clearly established law, Ayala had the constitutional right to have a prison guard, who was *14 present at the scene, intervene in the assault … Briggs, 475 U.S. 335, 341 , 106 S.Ct. 1092, 1096 , 89 L.Ed.2d 271 (1986), the Supreme Court clarified the standard of qualified immunity established by Harlow , and noted that a public official defendant is entitled to qualified

Kelleher v. New York State Trooper Fearon

90 F. Supp. 2d 354 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 23, 2000

Where the plaintiff alleges the violation of a clearly established right — as was the case here — qualified immunity protects a police officer from civil liability lor violating a plaintiffs constitutional rights only if … Trooper Fearon would have been entitled to qualified immunity if, at the time of the challenged action, it was objectively reasonable for him to believe that his behavior did not violate the plaintiffs clearly established

66 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 451, 61 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 42,195 Linda Langley v. Adams County, Colorado Adams County Board of County Commissioners Elaine T. Valente, Individually and in Her Official Capacity James M. Nelms, Individually and in His Official Capacity Harold E. Kite, Individually and in His Official Capacity Randy Brodersen, Individually and in His Official Capacity Robert D. Millsap, Individually and in His Official Capacity

987 F.2d 1473 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 3, 1993

Once a defendant asserts the affirmative defense of qualified immunity, 4 "[t]he plaintiff carries the burden of convincing the court that the law was clearly established." [Pueblo Neighborhood Health Ctrs., Inc. v.] … Plaintiff has thus met her burden of showing clearly established law governing her First Amendment claim. 21 Defendants assert two factual bases for their qualified immunity defense.

Payne ex rel. D.P. v. Peninsula School District

623 F. App'x 846 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 3, 2015

MEMORANDUM ** Jodi Coy appeals the district court’s denial of summary judgment and qualified immunity. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Reviewing de novo, Preschooler II v. Clark Cty. Sch. Bd. … Coy is entitled to qualified immunity with respect to Plaintiffs Fourth Amendment claim because, at the time she acted, it would not have been clear to a *848 reasonable official that placing D.P. in the safe room, as part

Daphne Mosby v. Andrew Moore

Mississippi Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1995

Alternatively, their basis for the motion was that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity on the plaintiff's claims. … When officers or agents of the State of Mississippi are sued in a civil action, they enjoy qualified public official immunity.

Garcia v. Scoppetta

289 F. Supp. 2d 343 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 6, 2003

Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … “A defendant pleading qualified immunity on a motion to dismiss is entitled to prevail if the allegations in the complaint fail to ‘state a claim of violation of clearly established law.’ ” McEvoy v.

Martha Hoyt v. Bernard Cooks

672 F.3d 972 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 27, 2012

“Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities as long as their conduct violates no clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … ’s actions was clearly established at the time of the incident.

Michael McReynolds v. Darrell Schmidli

4 F.4th 648 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 13, 2021

The district court concluded that while Schmidli (but not Gentile) had violated McReynolds’ constitutional rights, he was entitled to qualified immunity on the excessive force claim because the right was not clearly established … We reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity to Schmidli because it was clearly established at the time of the incident that the level of force Schmidli asserted against McReynolds

Roe v. Sherry

91 F.3d 1270 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 31, 1996

He also contends the officers are not entitled to qualified immunity. DISCUSSION A. … A fundamental inquiry in a qualified immunity analysis is “whether the plaintiff has asserted a violation of a constitutional right at all.” Siegert v.

Gann v. Cline

519 F.3d 1090 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 11, 2008

“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials . . . from damages actions unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” Elder v. Holloway, 510 U.S. 510, 512 (1994). … do, we examine whether the right was clearly established.

Elizabeth Sebesta v. Andrea Davis

878 F.3d 226 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 21, 2017

The district court, recall, held that Childs and Bean were entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutional in- jury was not clearly established. … Our focus is on the second part of the immunity test—whether the right on which Sebesta relies was clearly established.