Case law

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.

Walker v. Schwalbe

112 F.3d 1127 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 15, 1997

Standard of Review A district court’s ruling that an official’s conduct violated clearly established law so that the official is not entitled to a ruling of qualified immunity prior to trial is reviewed de novo. … Qualified Immunity Even though Walker has established a genuine issue of material fact, the defendants may be protected from liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity.

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 .

Wilson v. Falk

877 F.3d 1204 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Dec 19, 2017

DISCUSSION Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials “generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … “When a defendant asserts qualified immunity at summary judgment, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right and (2) the constitutional right was clearly established

Nicholas Coffey v. Adam Carroll

933 F.3d 577 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 5, 2019

Standard Of Review The qualified immunity doctrine protects public officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Alternatively, for purposes of qualified immunity, the officers say it is not clearly established that entry into a misdemeanor-suspect’s home when officers are in hot pursuit constitutes an unreasonable search.

Ziccardi v. City Of Philadelphia

288 F.3d 57 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 30, 2002

The individual defendants asserted the defense of qualified immunity, but the district court refused to grant summary judgment on that ground. … a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. 4 See Eddy v.

United States v. Crawford

520 F.3d 1072 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 28, 2008

Under the modified categorical approach, the prior offense may qualify as a career offender predicate offense if “ ‘documentation or judicially noticeable facts ... clearly establish that the conviction is a predicate conviction … “The government has the burden to establish clearly and unequivocally that the conviction was based on all of the elements of a qualifying predicate offense.” Kovac, 367 F.3d at 1119 .

John Dukeman, II v. Dylon Wyatt

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 12, 2026

Once qualified immunity is asserted, the plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating the law confirming his constitutional right was clearly established. Hanson, as Trustee for Layton v. … Trooper Wyatt is entitled to qualified immunity on Dukeman’s claim that he violated a clearly established right by not issuing a canine warning prior to the sheriff’s deputy’s decision to deploy his police canine.

Torres v. City of Madera

648 F.3d 1119 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 22, 2011

Qualified Immunity We must next consider whether Officer Noriega is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity because the alleged unlawfulness of her conduct was not clearly established as of October 27, 2002, for the “inquiries … The district court nonetheless determined Officer Noriega was entitled to qualified immunity because the law in 2002 did not clearly establish that an unreasonable mistaken use of force violated the Fourth Amendment.

Vondrak v. City of Las Cruces

535 F.3d 1198 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 5, 2008

We have held that, for a right to be clearly established, “there must be a Supreme Court or Tenth Circuit decision on point, or the clearly established weight of authority from other courts must have found the law to be as … right that was allegedly violated was ‘clearly established.’ ” Id.

Jeremy Meyers v. Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wi

836 F.3d 818 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2016

In  addition  to  being  a  defense,  however,  sovereign  immunity, like qualified immunity, also bears the character‐ istics  of  “immunity  from  trial  and  the  attendant  burdens  of  litigation.” Abelesz v.  … Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 672 (2009)  (qualified immunity “is both a defense to liability and a lim‐ ited  entitlement  not  to  stand  trial  or  face  the  other  burdens  of litigation.”). 

Opinion No. (2005)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Oct 3, 2005

clearly established law"). … Individual District Directors would enjoy qualified immunity that "shields public officials from suit insofar as the official's conduct did not violate any clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

Berkley Specialty Insurance Company v. Masterforce Construction Corp.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 26, 2021

judgment on the pleadings.27 Berkley asserts that it is entitled to judgment in its favor as, for five reasons, it owed no duty to indemnify Masterforce.28 First, Berkley contends that Masterforce’s conduct does not qualify … Galloway, 483 F.3d 258, 271 (4th Cir. 2007) (noting that, under the qualified immunity standard, a constitutional right is not clearly established when there are “conflicting decisions” in that area); Soares v.

Ronald S. Biddle v. Amy J. Martin and Paul Lehmann

992 F.2d 673 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 22, 1993

The court also found that because the arrest was reasonable, the officers violated no clearly established constitutional rights, and consequently were entitled to qualified immunity for their actions. … In this case, then, qualified immunity shields the defendant police officers from Biddle’s damage action if “a reasonable officer could have believed [Biddle’s arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and

Sanders v. Howze

177 F.3d 1245 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 14, 1999

Under the qualified immunity doctrine, government officials performing discretionary functions are immune not just from liability, but from suit, unless the conduct which is the basis for suit violates clearly established … To overcome the defendants’ qualified immunity, plaintiffs must establish that the defendants’ conduct violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which

Doninger v. Niehoff

642 F.3d 334 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 25, 2011

established, we affirm the district court’s decision on the ground that 9 Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. … issue was clearly 13 established in certain respects.”

Victor George Bryant v. William R. Muth Gregg Robbins

994 F.2d 1082 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 24, 1993

The district court held that Muth and Robbins were not entitled to qualified immunity and that, even though Bryant had no constitutional right to , possess the contraband disks, he did have a clearly established constitutional … Once the defendant raises, a qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff carries the burden of showing that the defendant’s alleged conduct violated the law and that such law was clearly established when the alleged violation

Collymore v. Commissioner of D.O.C.

74 F.4th 22 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 14, 2023

But qualified immunity “shields public officials from liability for their discretionary 18 acts that do ‘not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … The right to be free from such a condition is clearly established.

David Glen Meyers v. Contra Costa County Department of Social Services, Defendants

812 F.2d 1154 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 16, 1987

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, executive officers are shielded from liability where “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Haaland’s conduct on October 23, which indisputably involved no physical interference with parental custody, cannot be said to have violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.

Jamel Walker v. James H. Gomez Kingston W. Prunty R.R. Rath, Correctional Sergeant

370 F.3d 969 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 7, 2004

Defendants also assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity. 6 Under Saucier v. … Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001), we undertake a two-step inquiry in determining whether qualified immunity applies.