Case law

James F. Robinson v. Solano County Brian Cauwells, Solano County Sheriff's Deputy Officer Gary Faulkner, Solano County Sheriff's Deputy Officer

218 F.3d 1030 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 12, 2000

Qualified immunity “ ‘shield[s] [government agents] from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Layne, 526 U.S. 603, 615 , 119 S.Ct. 1692 , 143 L.Ed.2d 818 (1999) (“ ‘clearly established’ ” for purposes of qualified immunity does not mean that “ ‘an official action is pro *1036 tected by qualified immunity unless the

Vicky M. v. Northeastern Educational Intermediate Unit

689 F. Supp. 2d 721 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 16, 2009

An official is entitled to qualified immunity if a reasonable official in their position at all relevant times could have believed, in light of clearly established law, that their conduct comported with established legal … NEIU Defendants The individual NEIU defendants are entitled to qualified immunity if a reasonable official in their position could have believed, in light of clearly established law, that their conduct comported with established

Rivas v. City of Passaic

365 F.3d 181 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 26, 2004

a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.” … We note that Garcia and Rodriguez do not argue on appeal that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established as of November 1998.

Hale v. Emporia State University

265 F. Supp. 3d 1236 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jul 14, 2017

Qualified immunity shields a government official from a money damages award in his or her personal capacity “unless ‘the official violated a statutory or constitutional right,’ and ‘the right was “clearly established” at … . *1247 Here, the court concludes that plaintiffs Complaint alleges facts sufficient to establish that the individual defendants violated a clearly established .constitutional right.

Mencer v. Bd. of Ed./Birmingham, AL

134 F.3d 1066 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 5, 1998

Thus, the court did not deny Hammonds qualified immunity based only on "evidence sufficiency" but on its belief that a reasonable person in Hammonds' position would have known his conduct violated clearly established law … Thus, if we are confronted with an appeal from a denial of qualified immunity, we may exercise our discretion to review the district court's preliminary determination as a means of reaching the issue of clearly established

Wiltzius v. Town of New Milford

453 F. Supp. 2d 421 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Sep 18, 2006

In opposing *432 these counts, the individual defendants urge that they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate any clearly established rights of the defendant or, in the alternative, the actions of … As this court agrees that the substantive due process rights claimed by the plaintiff are not clearly established, it grants the individual defendants qualified immunity on these claims.

Katie Kindl v. City of Berkley

798 F.3d 391 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 18, 2015

Qualified immunity protects government officials sued under § 1983 from damages liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … To qualify as clearly established, “‘[t]he contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.’” Brown v.

Morrison-Tiffin v. Hampton

117 N.C. App. 494 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 3, 1995

The individual defendants have asserted the defense of qualified immunity. A. Equal Protection 1. … The test for qualified immunity was set forth in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 73 L.

Flores Camilo v. Alvarez Ramirez

283 F. Supp. 2d 440 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · May 21, 2003

Qualified Immunity According to Defendant, his conduct is protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity because it was imminently reasonable and did not violate clearly established law. … The general rule regarding qualified immunity is that government officials are immune from suit and liability when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory authority or constitutional rights, which a reasonable

Whisman v. Rinehart

119 F.3d 1303 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 23, 1997

Qualified Immunity 17 Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity unless they violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … Id. 21 We take a broad view of what constitutes "clearly established" under the qualified immunity analysis. Munz v. Michael, 28 F.3d 795, 799 (8th Cir.1994).

Mason Ex Rel. Mason v. Schenectady City School District

879 F. Supp. 215 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 21, 1993

There is, in short, no controversy about whether punitive damages are available against individual defendants sued in their individual capacities. 5 (5) QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The individual defendants claim entitlement to qualified … The individual defendants seek qualified immunity, however.

Outlaw v. City of Hartford

884 F.3d 351 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 7, 2018

Holloway, 510 U.S. 510, 516 (1994). 7 Allen contends that in December 2004, the law governing his conduct 8 was not sufficiently clearly established because "it was not clearly established that an 9 … Creighton, 483 U.S. at 640-41. 15 Where the right at issue in the circumstances confronting police officers was clearly 16 established but was violated, the officer will still be entitled to qualified immunity if 17

Logiodice v. Trustees of Maine Central Institute

135 F. Supp. 2d 199 · District Court, D. Maine · Mar 5, 2001

to dismissal based on qualified immunity. … are entitled to qualified immunity.

Henry v. Ryan

775 F. Supp. 247 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 30, 1991

Government officials enjoy immunity from civil damages if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … “Closely analogous cases, those decided before the defendants acted, ... are required to find that a constitutional right is clearly established.” Powers v.

Jenny Wernsing, Charles Bingaman and Troy Cannon v. Odell Thompson, Jr.

423 F.3d 732 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 9, 2005

The district court also rejected Thompson’s claim of qualified immunity, holding that it was clearly established that Thompson’s alleged actions restricting or retaliating against plaintiffs’ speech on matters of public concern … If the clearly established question could be resolved merely by observing that unjustified prior restraints on speech are prohibited, then no defendant could ever prevail on the clearly established prong of the qualified

Henrise v. Horvath

174 F. Supp. 2d 493 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 30, 2001

Conversely, an official’s conduct is not protected by qualified immunity if, in light of clearly established pre-existing law, it was apparent the conduct, when undertaken, would be a violation of the right at issue. … To preclude qualified immunity, it is not necessary for a plaintiff to establish that “the [specific] action in question has previously been held unlawful.” Anderson v.

Williams v. Condon

347 S.C. 227 · Court of Appeals of South Carolina · Oct 1, 2001

But the alternative of qualifying a prosecutor’s immunity would disserve the broader public interest. … Furthermore, the O’Laughlin Court clearly stated that the provisions of the Tort Claims Act do not supplant common law immunity doctrines. Prosecutorial immunity is a common law immunity doctrine.

Brooke Somers v. Anthony Devine

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Mar 24, 2025

Indeed, as a matter of constitutional avoidance, we often grant qualified immunity based on a determination “that the purported right was not clearly established without resolving the ‘often more difficult … Determining whether a right is “clearly established” cannot be done in isolation from the perceived facts of the case in which the immunity is claimed.

Lee v. Cline

149 Md. App. 38 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 26, 2002

In Lee’s case, the circumstances do not so clearly establish that there was a second stop. … The Qualified Immunity Debate At the summary judgment hearing, Lee’s attorney argued that, even if the evidence was insufficient to establish that Cline acted with malice, Lee must be allowed to proceed on his constitutional

James Gladden, Jr. v. Kenneth Richbourg

759 F.3d 960 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 23, 2014

Thus, Gladden can prevail against the officers only if they violated his clearly established constitutional rights. Qualified immunity protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” … If, based on those facts, the officer reasonably failed to comprehend that he was violating a person’s clearly established constitutional rights, he is entitled to qualified immunity from suit. Id.