Case law

Mark Shane Bishop v. Deputy Dale Glazier

723 F.3d 957 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 30, 2013

was clearly established. … Glazier is thus entitled to qualified immunity, because he did not violate Bishop’s then clearly established constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment. See LaCross, 713 F.3d at 1158.

Roger D. Young v. Grady B. Lynch Sgt. Benthall H.R. Daughtry Officer Newell G.T. Cousins John Doe, Correctional Officer, (Two Cases)

846 F.2d 960 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 20, 1988

The interlocutory appeal to resolve the question of qualified immunity conclusively determines whether the official’s conduct violated clearly established law and therefore whether the official must defend against a claim … They contend that at the time of Young’s disciplinary hearing, it was not clearly established that an inmate had the right to demand production of real evidence at a disciplinary hearing.

Staats v. Brown

139 Wash. 2d 757 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 6, 2000

clearly established at the time of the act. … Qualified immunity is not available to Officer Brown for the alleged search as the Fourth Amendment right to be free of a warrantless residential search in the circumstances as alleged is clearly established. C.

Maria Morales v. Sonya Fry

873 F.3d 817 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 16, 2017

Dissent by Judge Bea OPINION McKEOWN, Circuit Judge: The primary issue in this appeal is whether the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis should b,e submitted to a jury, Following the lead of nearly … The chief issue in this appeal is whether the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, whether the constitutional right was “clearly established,” should have been submitted to the jury. 2 We hold that the “clearly

Tesson v. Commissioner, Massachusetts Department of Public Welfare

7 Mass. L. Rptr. 138 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Mar 27, 1997

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 817-18 (1982) (establishing qualified immunity standard under 42 U.S.C. §1983 ); See also Anderson v. … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 641 (1987) (qualified immunity allows a defendant to move for summary judgment on the ground that, based on “clearly established” rights, he could reasonably have believed his acts to be lawful).

Hampton v. Oktibbeha County Sheriff Dept.

480 F.3d 358 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 26, 2007

If the plaintiff fails to state a constitutional claim or if the defendant's conduct was objectively reasonable under clearly established law, then the government official is entitled to qualified immunity. … The officers instead argue that their actions were objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law at the time of the events. 16 The district court declined to grant qualified immunity to any of the officers on

Reno v. East Baton Rouge Parish School Board

697 F. Supp. 2d 659 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Mar 23, 2010

Whether Defendant, Placide, Is Entitled to Qualified Immunity For a right to be clearly established such that qualified immunity is inapplicable, “the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official … establishes the applicable law for purposes of qualified immunity, and that the plaintiff has met her burden of demonstrating that qualified immunity does not apply in this case.

Swanson v. Town of Mountain View, Colo.

577 F.3d 1196 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 19, 2009

immunity because the stops did not amount to Fourth Amendment violations—or at least not violations of clearly established Fourth Amendment principles. … Analysis Qualified immunity protects “government officials performing discretionary functions” and shields them from “liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

Thompson v. Williams

320 F. App'x 678 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 26, 2009

The district court also properly concluded that the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly-established at the time of the violation that the defendants were required to provide him with either … Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 200-01, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001) (“Where the defendant seeks qualified immunity, a ruling on that issue should be made early in the proceedings so that the costs and expenses of trial are

Morrow v. Meachum

917 F.3d 870 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 8, 2019

And qualified immunity applied in all five. Cases cutting both ways do not clearly establish the law. 3. … Some courts have suggested dicta can clearly establish the law for purposes of qualified immunity.

Torcasio v. Murray

57 F.3d 1340 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 29, 1995

. — was clearly established. … “In analyzing a claim of qualified immunity it is ... necessary first to identify the specific ... right allegedly violated, then to inquire whether at the time of the alleged violation it was clearly established, then further

Breck v. Ulmer

745 P.2d 66 · Alaska Supreme Court · Nov 6, 1987

If the law was not clearly established, the public official will be immune. … immunity if their conduct in awarding the contract did not violate clearly established law.

Charles Dewey Latimore v. George Widseth, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney

7 F.3d 709 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 12, 1993

“Qualified immunity protects a government official from suit if, at the time of the challenged acts, it was not clearly established that those actions would violate clearly established law of which a reasonable person would … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.”

Musso v. Hourigan

836 F.2d 736 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 5, 1988

In reaching this result, the Court noted that the doctrine of qualified immunity rests on the belief that “where an official’s duties legitimately require action in which clearly established rights are not implicated, the … Qualified Immunity Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, a government official performing discretionary functions is protected from *742 personal liability to the extent that his “conduct does not violate clearly established

Patrick F. McBride and Sonya S. McBride v. Steven H. Taylor and Dwight A. Sewall

924 F.2d 386 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jan 30, 1991

General Principles of Qualified Immunity ■ Public officials performing discretionary functions enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … This Court will not go so far as to hold that a district court’s entering of a temporary injunction creates clearly established constitutional rights barring an official’s entitlement to qualified immunity.

A.C. v. Erica Cortez

34 F.4th 783 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 13, 2022

The district court also ruled that the individual Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because Plaintiffs failed to show “that there was a constitutional deprivation” and, even if there were, “it was not clearly … We conclude that Gonzalez cannot be viewed as identifying a constitutional right for qualified immunity purposes or otherwise.

Meeker v. Edmundson

415 F.3d 317 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jul 13, 2005

Moreover, the district court refused to dismiss this claim against Coach Edmundson on the basis of qualified immunity, reasoning that "at the time of the alleged incidents, it was clearly established that a state actor could … Only if a plaintiff alleges the violation of a clearly established constitutional right does his com- plaint survive a motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds. A.

Mahler v. Gatten

40 F. App'x 415 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 10, 2002

The question properly before us, then, is whether, after drawing all reasonable factual inferences in favor of Mahler, qualified immunity was appropriately denied. … In evaluating a claim of qualified immunity, we first ask whether the facts alleged show the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right.

Workman v. Jordan

958 F.2d 332 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 16, 1992

Discovery should not be allowed until the court resolves the threshold question whether the law was clearly established at the time the allegedly unlawful action occurred. Id. … fail[ ] to show that his or her conduct violated clearly established law of which a reasonable person would have known,” or the defendant can raise the immunity issue in a summary judgment motion.

Karen Jo Barrow v. Greenville Independent School District, Herman Smith, Dr.

332 F.3d 844 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 2, 2003

Herman Smith, on the ground of qualified immunity, and certified it as final. 1 We reverse. … The district court determined that Barrow had failed to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right in 1998 and that Smith was therefore entitled to qualified immunity.