Case law

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.

Sam Thurmond, Sr. v. Gary Andrews

972 F.3d 1007 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 28, 2020

A grant of qualified immunity is inappropriate, absent an obvious violation, if the right was not clearly established. … The right in question, even if properly defined, was not clearly established. As such, a grant of qualified immunity was appropriate.

Acierno v. Cloutier

40 F.3d 597 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 18, 1994

immunity is to examine whether the plaintiff has "allege[d] the violation of a clearly established constitutional right." … In a recent discussion of the "clearly established" right aspect of the qualified immunity determination, we stated: 75 The right an official is alleged to have violated must have been "clearly established" in a "particularized

Penthouse International, Ltd. v. Edwin A. Meese, Iii, Attorney General of the United States

939 F.2d 1011 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 24, 1991

did not violate any clearly-established First Amendment right. … If it does not — or at least if the right is not clearly established — the government’s motive is irrelevant.

George Owens v. Matthew J. Frank

394 F.3d 490 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 6, 2005

, but ‘an unreasonable application’ of clearly established federal law, or based on ‘an unreasonable determination of the facts’ (emphasis added).”); Dixon v. … Section 2254(d)(1) provides that habeas relief shall not be afforded unless a state court reached a result "that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined

Robert Jackson v. Richard J. Elrod

881 F.2d 441 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 7, 1989

Their conduct clearly violated the law established in Bell , therefore the doctrine of qualified immunity does not protect them from liability for damages for the book rejections.” Jackson v. … The defendants here claim qualified immunity because the case law did not clearly establish that it was a denial of a pretrial detainee’s First Amendment rights to ban his receipt of all hard-back books, regardless of the

Travis Rickey Childress, Slaton Jenkins Childress, Gary Dennis Childress v. Small Business Administration, A.G. McClearen and Clyde Rice, Jr.

825 F.2d 1550 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 31, 1987

We nonetheless conclude that appellants were entitled to qualified immunity for their actions because they did not act to deny the Childresses this property interest in violation of a clearly-established constitutional norm … “Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” Id. at 2816.

Skoog v. County of Clackamas

469 F.3d 1221 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 20, 2006

9 If the answer is no, the officer is entitled to qualified immunity. … At some future point, this right will become clearly established in this Circuit.

Soto v. Gaudett

862 F.3d 148 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 5, 2017

or constitutional right that was clearly established at 19 the time of the challenged conduct.'" … The Taser Deployments by Stepniewski and Robinson 7 Although Stepniewski and Robinson argue that they too were entitled to summary 8 judgment based on qualified immunity because it was not clearly established

Kathy Dyer v. City of Mesquite Texas

964 F.3d 374 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 6, 2020

clearly established law.’” … Turning to prong two of the qualified immunity standard, we ask whether there are genuine disputes of material fact as to whether “the unlawfulness of the [Officers’] conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’”

Segrain v. Duffy

118 F.4th 45 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Sep 23, 2024

established, preventing an award of qualified immunity"); Tedder, 527 F. … Furthermore, qualified immunity protects government officials sued in their individual capacities against claims for monetary damages for violations of clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.

Luis O. Juarbe-Angueira v. Luis Rafael Arias, Director of the Public Building Authority

831 F.2d 11 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Sep 29, 1987

the law defining those rights was “clearly established in plaintiff’s favor.” … And, we have said more specifically that a defendant faced with a political discharge claim enjoys qualified immunity unless, at the time of dismissal, “it was clearly established that employees in the particular positions

Cárdenas v. Muangman

998 A.2d 303 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 17, 2010

Analysis of Appellants’ Expert’s Testimony Because the requirements for qualifying an expert to testify and assessing the qualified expert’s testimony for sufficiency overlap, they are susceptible to being confused. … apply District of Columbia law (and therefore allow Camacho’s claim to proceed) under the conflict of laws analysis used in that state. 10 The “potential interests of the jurisdictions involved,” Stutsman, 546 A.2d at 374, clearly

LaShay v. DEPT. OF SOCIAL & REHAB. SERV.

625 A.2d 224 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Jan 15, 1993

We have recognized two degrees of official immunity: absolute *227 immunity and qualified immunity. Id., 151 Vt. at 184-85 , 559 A.2d at 1078 . … "Good faith exists where an official's acts did not violate clearly established rights of which the official reasonably should have known." Murray v. White, 155 Vt. 621, 630 , 587 A.2d 975, 980 (1991).

Waeschle v. Dragovic

576 F.3d 539 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 14, 2009

Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. Id. (citation omitted). … She also contends that the cornea cases serve to satisfy the second prong of Saucier' s qualified-immunity analysis because they allegedly demonstrate that the right to her mother’s brain was clearly established.

Anna Wealot v. Alvin Brooks

865 F.3d 1119 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 4, 2017

Section 1983 Claims Qualified immunity protects government officials from incurring civil liability as long as “‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … To overcome the shield of qualified immunity, a plaintiffs claim must state a violation of a clearly established federal right, and that right must have been clearly established at the time of the violation. See Nord v.

Moore v. Vega

371 F.3d 110 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 10, 2004

entitlement to qualified immunity. … : qualified immunity protects that officer unless his performance was in violation of clearly established law, or was plainly incompetent.

Elaine Thompson v. Ulenzen King

730 F.3d 742 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Sep 20, 2013

a constitutional or statutory right; and (2) [whether] the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation." … Therefore, because the constitutional right was clearly established, the district court properly denied Officer King qualified immunity. III.

Burnham v. Ianni

119 F.3d 668 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 11, 1997

Long, 72 F.3d 70, 73 (8th Cir.1995), "[t]his court has taken a broad view of what constitutes 'clearly established law' for the purposes of a qualified immunity inquiry." … test, it can rarely be considered 'clearly established' for purposes of the Harlow qualified immunity standard." 21 Id. at 916 (emphasis added) (quoted in Grantham v.

Izen v. Catalina

382 F.3d 566 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 23, 2004

Qualified Immunity The district court offered alternative reasons for holding that Catalina is entitled to qualified immunity. … The second prong of qualified immunity analysis requires us to determine whether the agent’s conduct violated clearly established federal law. Kinney, 367 F.3d at 350 .