Case law

Ledvina v. Cerasani

213 Ariz. 569 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Oct 31, 2006

reports in the public interest, a situation clearly not present here. … A qualified privilege is inadequate under the circumstances....

Martinez v. City Of Schenectady

115 F.3d 111 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 13, 1997

does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known,' Harlow v. … established federal rights. 54 The district court's order denying the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity is reversed.

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.

MacDonald v. Angelone

69 F. Supp. 2d 787 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Sep 2, 1999

The doctrine of good faith qualified immunity shields government employees performing discretionary functions from civil liability unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Second, courts must determine whether the right is clearly established. See id. (citing Collinson, 895 F.2d at 998 ).

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 .

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?

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.

Lundblad v. Celeste

924 F.2d 627 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 31, 1991

The doctrine of qualified immunity, as defined in Harlow, supra at 818 , 102 S.Ct. at 2738 , shields officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Thus the law was not clearly established on the issue, and the doctrine of official immunity shields the defendants from civil damages. *629 Accordingly, the opinion of the Court in Lundblad 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

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.

Charles E. Johnson v. Dan Schneiderheinz, Individually and as Sheriff of Merrick County, Nebraska, County of Merrick, Nebraska

102 F.3d 340 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 7, 1997

The sheriff moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … Government officials are qualifiedly immune from liability in civil actions to the extent their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

Idoux v. Lamar University System

828 F. Supp. 1252 · District Court, E.D. Texas · Jul 13, 1993

Qualified Immunity The question of whether qualified immunity will protect an official is one of law for the Court to decide. Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806, 2815-2816 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985). … To be entitled to qualified immunity, a governmental official must have been performing discretionary functions, and his conduct must not have violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Johnson v. Wilson

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 20, 2024

A court should not define “clearly established law at a high level of generality,” id. … Officer Dorghoud is not entitled to relief on Counts I, III, or IV Even considering the body-worn camera footage, Officer Dorghoud has not established his entitlement to qualified immunity or qualified privilege

Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General Re: Use of Marijuana for Certain Medical Conditions

132 So. 3d 786 · Supreme Court of Florida · Jan 27, 2014

We also conclude that the ballot title and summary comply with section 101.161(1) because they are not clearly and conclusively defective. … This limited immunity is necessary because, in the absence of such immunity, the mere act of prescribing marijuana, a controlled substance under Florida law, would result in civil or criminal liability or sanctions, which

Ospina v. Department of Corrections, State of Del.

749 F. Supp. 572 · District Court, D. Delaware · Oct 31, 1990

In reviewing a qualified immunity claim, the District Court must determine whether a reasonable officer could have believed the defendant’s actions were lawful in light of clearly established law and of the information the … The constitutional infirmity of such police conduct thus was “clearly established” at the time of the arrest in this case.

Harvey A. Thompson v. City of Starkville, Mississippi, David Lindley, Larry Sisk, and Jimmy Raines, Individually and in Their Official Capacities

901 F.2d 456 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 3, 1990

Forsyth, it has been established that an appeal may be taken of a finding against qualified immunity where the issue involved is the purely legal one of “whether the legal norms allegedly violated by the defendant were clearly … Perez, 751 F.2d 1472 , 1477 n. 13 (5th Cir.1985) (“Under the qualified immunity standard, government officials are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory