Case law

Robert Pachaly, Jr. v. City of Lynchburg R.D. Viar William G. Petty, and Commonwealth of Virginia

897 F.2d 723 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Mar 2, 1990

A government official performing a discretionary function does so clothed with qualified immunity shielding him from civil liability as long as his actions do not violate clearly established tenets of constitutional law. … judgment for the defendant on the ground that even under the defendant’s version of the facts the defendant's conduct violated clearly established law, whether the law clearly proscribed the actions the defendant claims

Leghart Ex Rel. Leghart v. Hauk

25 F. Supp. 2d 748 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Nov 23, 1998

As such, “[qualified immunity protects a police officer from liability if a reasonable competent law enforcement officer would not have known that his actions violated clearly established law.” Harper v. … “The first step is to determine whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.” Id.

Dora Elizabeth Cook v. Gwinnett Co. School Dist.

414 F.3d 1313 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 29, 2005

clearly established.” … immunity because they violated clearly established law.

Pittman v. Nelms

87 F.3d 116 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 26, 1996

The immunity level consists of two sub-issues--whether the law governing the violation was clearly established at the time of the incident, Siegert v. … But it invokes immunity prematurely if the facts indicate no constitutional violation, clearly established or otherwise 3 Like Pittman, Graham grounded his claim on multiple provisions of the Constitution.

Richko Ex Rel. Horvath v. Wayne County

819 F.3d 907 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 15, 2016

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability under § 1983 if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of No. 15-1524 … To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, a court evaluates two independent prongs: whether the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and whether that right was clearly established at

Hurt v. Parker

462 S.W.3d 403 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · May 1, 2015

established priorities and needs.” … Thus, the principal was entitled to qualified immunity.

Heitschmidt v. The City of Houston

161 F.3d 834 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 16, 1998

With regard to his unlawful detention claim, Heitschmidt asserts his clearly established right to be free from unreasonable seizure of his person, a right which he maintains includes the clearly established right to be … defense of qualified immunity.’”

Bradshaw v. Meyer

District Court, D. Colorado · Sep 30, 2025

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … No clearly established law. Additionally, no clearly established law confirmed that Ontiveras’ actions were unconstitutional.

Keith K. Stevens v. Scott Rose, Esq. Kenny Moore County of Lander, and Troy Hanson

298 F.3d 880 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 2, 2002

Establishing qualified immunity requires that the official’s conduct be objectively reasonable “as measured by reference to clearly established law.” Harlow v. … We therefore affirm the district court’s denial of Hanson’s motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity. AFFIRMED. 1 .

Brantley v. Wysocki

145 F. Supp. 3d 407 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 30, 2015

Corporal Wysocki is entitled to qualified immunity on Brantley’s First Amendment Retaliation claim “Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability from civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate … The next question is determining if Brantley’s constitutional right is clearly established.

Avi Adelman v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 20, 2019

Adelman bears the burden of negating Branch’s qualified immunity defense by showing “(1) that [Branch] violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged … “The right to be free from arrest without probable cause is a clearly established constitutional right” for qualified immunity purposes. Westfall v. Luna, 903 F.3d 534, 542 (5th Cir. 2018) (quoting Mangieri v.

Eastland County Cooperative Dispatch, Eastland County, and the City of Gorman v. Elnor Maxine Poyner, Individually and as Independent of the Estate of William Euell Poyner, and as Sole Heir of William Euell Poyner

Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland) · Oct 25, 2001

The motions for summary judgment implicated the doctrines of sovereign immunity, official immunity, and qualified immunity. … Was that general prohibition the source for clearly established law which the officers violated in this case?

Torres-Rivera v. Calderón-Serra

328 F. Supp. 2d 237 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Aug 5, 2004

Qualified Immunity “[Gjovernment officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Therefore, the Court has room for only one conclusion: that plaintiffs have failed to establish the second prong of the qualified immunity test, that the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Rucker v. Marshall

119 F.4th 395 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 14, 2024

To deny qualified immunity, a district court must find “that the alleged conduct amounts to a constitutional violation” and that “the right was clearly established at the time of the conduct.” Buehler v. … To establish excessive force, a plaintiff must show “(1) injury, (2) which resulted directly and only from a use of force that was clearly excessive, and (3) the excessiveness of which was clearly unreasonable.” Byrd v.

Jon Holland v. Martin Simmerman

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 25, 2026

“Qualified immunity shields public officials from liability for civil damages if their conduct did not ‘violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” … To overcome dismissal based on qualified immunity, “the plaintiff must plead facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of

NUON v. City of Lowell

768 F. Supp. 2d 323 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 4, 2011

The principle of qualified immunity shields a police officer from liability for civil damages when his conduct does not violate clearly-established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … On this point, Kinney would not be entitled to qualified immunity.

Ganek v. Leibowitz

874 F.3d 73 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 17, 2017

 immunity on the ground that the right was not  then clearly established.   …  immunity and summary judgment  should  be  granted  to  the  defendant  on  the  basis  of  qualified  immunity”).   

Morales v. New York

22 F. Supp. 3d 256 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 22, 2014

A qualified immunity defense is established where “(a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable for the defendant to believe that his action did not violate such … When considering a claim of qualified immunity, courts ask first whether there was a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Id. at 706 .

E.A.F.F. v. Gonzalez

600 F. App'x 205 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 16, 2015

The analysis of a defense of qualified immunity involves two steps. “First, a court must decide whether a plaintiffs allegation, if true, establishes a violation of a clearly established right.” Hernandez ex rel. … Whether the plaintiffs have alleged a violation of a clearly established right, as required under the first step of this court’s qualified immunity analysis, is not at issue.

Nelson Ex Rel. the Estate of Nelson v. Prison Health Services, Inc.

991 F. Supp. 1452 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 30, 1997

Qualified Immunity The Sheriff argues that the doctrine of qualified immunity precludes his individual liability for civil damages. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil. damages as long as their actions do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional