Case law

Leichter v. Lebanon Board of Education

917 F. Supp. 2d 177 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Jan 9, 2013

Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability where the officials’ conduct was not in violation of a ‘clearly established’ constitutional right.” Sudler v. … by qualified immunity.”

FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUN. v. Romer

921 P.2d 84 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Jun 27, 1996

clearly established statutory or *90 constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … What is "clearly established law" is a question of law, and a court engaging in review of a qualified immunity determination should therefore use "its full knowledge of its own [and other relevant] precedents."

Thomas v. City of Troy

293 F. Supp. 3d 282 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 22, 2018

Qualified Immunity "Once qualified immunity is pleaded, plaintiff's complaint will be dismissed unless defendant's alleged conduct, when committed, violated 'clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Sikirica is not entitled to qualified immunity at this time. See Wise v.

Wilson v. Lawrence County

260 F.3d 946 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 15, 2001

Qualified Immunity 13 "[G]overnment officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 638 (1987). 14 In determining if appellants are entitled to qualified immunity we must ask whether Wilson states a violation of a constitutional right, and whether that right was clearly established

Wayne Ernest Barker v. Ben Norman and Jack Ballas

651 F.2d 1107 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 30, 1981

qualified immunity defenses. … The Scope of the Qualified Immunity-Defenses 1.

McCollum v. Garrett

880 S.W.2d 530 · Kentucky Supreme Court · Sep 1, 1994

During the time in which McCollum essentially acted as an investigator, the protection available to him was qualified immunity. … . -, 113 S.Ct. 2606 , 125 L.Ed.2d 209 (1993), as follows: ... government officials are not subject to damages liability for the performance of their discretionary functions when "their conduct does not violate clearly established

Danny M. Bennett v. Dennis Lee Hendrix

423 F.3d 1247 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 9, 2005

DISCUSSION Our procedure in assessing qualified immunity is well-established. … Clearly Established Law The final step in the qualified immunity inquiry is determining whether the law was clearly established so as to put the defendants on notice that their behavior violated the plaintiffs’

Becerra v. Unified Government of Wyandotte County/Kansas City

272 F. Supp. 2d 1223 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jul 25, 2003

immunity’ Defendant Mots argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because his conduct violated no clearly established right of Plaintiffs. … Qualified immunity shields an individual government official performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages insofar as his conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Kanae v. Hodson

294 F. Supp. 2d 1179 · District Court, D. Hawaii · Nov 5, 2003

Hodson’s Qualified Immunity Defense. Hodson argues that he has qualified immunity with respect to Kanae’s claims. … Qualified immunity bars claims against government officials in their individual capacities if their conduct did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

Grace Ray v. E. J. Foltz

370 F.3d 1079 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 24, 2004

II The Qualified Immunity Defense When government officials act in a way that knowingly violates a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known, they are … We call this defense “qualified immunity” because the official is immune from a damage lawsuit, qualified upon his ability to show that he did not knowingly violate the plaintiff*s clearly established constitutional right

Matthews v. ALABAMA AGR. AND MECHANICAL UNIV.

787 So. 2d 691 · Supreme Court of Alabama · May 26, 2000

Matthews alleges that the university employees violated "clearly established Constitutional and statutory rights," that they "exceed[ed] the scope of their statutory and administrative authority," and that they acted willfully … or to qualified/substantive/ discretionary-function immunity.

Boswell v. County of Sherburne

849 F.2d 1117 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 21, 1988

were clearly established at the time of the challenged actions * * Mitchell v. … This court has in the past taken a broad view of what constitutes “clearly established law” for the purposes of a qualified immunity inquiry, requiring some but not precise factual correspondence with precedents and demanding

Prue v. City of Syracuse

26 F.3d 14 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 6, 1994

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … To establish qualified immunity, defendants must show either that their conduct “did not violate ‘clearly established rights’ of which a reasonable person would have known, or that it was ‘objectively reasonable’ to believe

Ober v. Evanko

80 F. App'x 196 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 21, 2003

The District Court denied Appellants’ motion, finding that Appellants violated Ober’s clearly established First Amendment rights and, thus, were not entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability from civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of

Steele v. Department of Corrections

215 Mich. App. 710 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 29, 1996

Consequently, Stone was entitled to qualified immunity under Ross v Consumers Power Co (On Rehearing), 420 Mich 567, 592 ; 363 NW2d 641 (1984). 3 Furthermore, plaintiff’s claim under 42 USC 1983 fails because he has *717 … not established deliberate indifference on Stone’s part.

J. Chris Lane v. Kentucky Department of Corrections

Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Sep 19, 2025

Qualified Immunity. … first addressing the Appellees’ qualified immunity arguments.

Farnworth v. Femling

125 Idaho 283 · Idaho Supreme Court · Mar 2, 1994

State, 123 Idaho 899 , 854 P.2d 242 (1993), the Court stated a three-part test to determine whether a party as *286 serting qualified immunity is entitled to the defense: 1. Was there a clearly established law? 2. … Did the conduct of the party asserting qualified immunity violate a clearly established right of the party claiming the violation? 3. Was the conduct of the party asserting qualified immunity reasonable?

Pace v. Capobianco

283 F.3d 1275 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 1, 2002

Qualified Immunity In the alternative, the individual defendants are due immunity. See generally Saucier v. … Qualified immunity protects government officials, in their individual capacities, from suit unless the law preexisting the defendant official’s supposedly wrongful act was already established to such a high degree that every

Eastwood v. Department of Corrections of Oklahoma

846 F.2d 627 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 12, 1988

Lovelace in his individual capacity survives the qualified immunity defense because plaintiff has established that Mr. Lovelace knew or should have known about plaintiff’s clearly established right of privacy. … To determine the applicability of a qualified immunity defense, an appellate court must examine if the official conduct at issue “violatefd] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Perez v. School Board

917 F. Supp. 2d 1261 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 17, 2013

Furthermore, because the Defendants have raised qualified immunity as a defense, Plaintiff must allege that the officers violated a clearly-established right. Williams, 102 F.3d at 1182 . … When qualified immunity is raised, Plaintiff must plead facts showing that, at the time of the beating the law clearly established that the force used by the officers was excessive.