Case law

Don Blankenship v. Joe Manchin, Iii, in His Individual Capacity and in His Official Capacity as Governor of the State of West Virginia

471 F.3d 523 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 20, 2006

Finding a constitutional violation of a clearly established right, the district court denied the application of qualified immunity. This appeal followed. II. … As Blankenship’s complaint alleges a constitutional violation of a clearly established right, qualified immunity does not attach to the Governor’s actions.

Jerauld ex rel. Robinson v. Kroger

353 S.W.3d 636 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Aug 5, 2011

Thus, Kroger could also use the defense of qualified official immunity. … Clearly, his actions were of a discretionary nature. We believe the acts undertaken by Kroger were discretionary in nature and entitled him to qualified official immunity.

Pennington v. Hobson

719 F. Supp. 760 · District Court, S.D. Indiana · Aug 4, 1989

Only those public officials who can show that their conduct was not violative of any of the plaintiffs clearly established rights are entitled to qualified immunity. Harlow v. … In the qualified immunity analysis, the issue was whether a reasonable police officer would have known that the arrest violated clearly established law.

Zieper v. Metzinger

392 F. Supp. 2d 516 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 22, 2005

Amendment, I must consider whether the defendants have established that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … I conclude that such an inquiry would be too narrow, and conflates the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity inquiry with the “reasonable officer” prong.

Conway v. Pasadena Humane Society

45 Cal. App. 4th 163 · California Court of Appeal · May 8, 1996

would violate a clearly established constitutional *178 or statutory right. … Further, an officer’s unreasonable ignorance that he has violated a clearly established right does not save his claim of qualified immunity. (Gilker v. Baker (9th Cir. 1978) 576 F.2d 245, 247 ; Coleman v.

Mason v. Village of Babylon, New York

124 F. Supp. 2d 807 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 20, 2000

clearly established constitutional rights. … At the very least, McManus is clearly entitled to qualified immunity on the false arrest claim. McManus was informed of an outstanding warrant and acted thereupon.

Fabrikant v. French

328 F. Supp. 2d 303 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 30, 2004

The qualified immunity doctrine insulates a governmental official performing discretionary functions from liability so long as his “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … were ‘clearly established’ at the time it was taken.”

Flynn v. City of Santa Clara

388 F. Supp. 3d 1158 · District Court, N.D. California · May 22, 2019

However, viewpoint discrimination is barred under clearly established First Amendment law. … Alcarez but, even if not, at the very least, qualified immunity protects the individual officers as there was no clearly established law holding that defense of others is a legal defense to a § 148(a)(1) violation. III.

Estate of Decedent Lolomania Soakai v. Abdelaziz

137 F.4th 969 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 16, 2025

Because the law was clearly established before the date of the car chase that defendants’ conduct was unconstitutional, defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity. … While creative, this doesn’t prove clearly established law. We should have granted qualified immunity to the Officers on this new substantive due process claim.

Scheuerman v. City of Huntsville, Al

499 F. Supp. 2d 1205 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Jul 23, 2007

Parnell, 193 F.3d 1263 , 1268 *1215 (11th Cir.1999) (quoting Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 ). 84 In analyzing a qualified immunity defense, district courts are to consider only the “clearly established law and … The law can be clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity “only by decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, or the highest court of the state where the case arose.”

Sabo v. City of Mentor

657 F.3d 332 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 12, 2011

Tkach appeals the district court’s denial of qualified immunity. … ) the issue appealed concerned whether a given set of facts showed a violation of clearly established law.

Kiles v. City of North Las Vegas

276 F. App'x 620 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 1, 2008

MEMORANDUM ** Robinson Reed appeals the district court’s denial of qualified immunity in this Section 1983 excessive force suit. We affirm. … The second step in qualified immunity analysis is whether the constitutional right at issue was clearly established at the time of the violation.

Mercer County Board of Education v. Holly Ruskauff

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 4, 2019

First, the BOE argues that it is entitled to qualified immunity and that qualified immunity bars negligence claims against governmental officials. … Accordingly, the BOE is entitled to qualified immunity; and, as such, we need not address the BOE’s other assignments of error.

Gene Bartholomew v. Commonwealth Of Pa

221 F.3d 425 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 7, 2000

established at the time those warrants were executed. 15 We note in this connection that, for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis, the "clearly established constitutional right" should be set forth with specificity … Thus, while it was "clearly established" that warrants must be particular, the narrower and more appropriate question, i.e. whether it was clearly established that one has a constitutional right to be free from a search pursuant

Heather Burton v. Patricia Richmond

276 F.3d 973 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 11, 2002

The Defendants have argued that qualified immunity bars the entirety of this lawsuit; specifically, contending at the time of the placement in 1985, the law was not clearly established that state caseworkers had a duty to … The Defendants ask this Court to reverse the district court’s denial of qualified immunity and dismiss this action.

Hicks v. City Of Watonga

942 F.2d 737 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Aug 19, 1991

immunity. 31 Clearly, the threat to fire Mr. … Diffey's lone vote. 72 The appellants are entitled to qualified immunity on the property interest claim unless they violated Mr. Hicks' clearly established right. Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818 , 102 S.Ct. at 2738 .

Mendoza v. United States Immigration & Customs Enforcement

849 F.3d 408 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 21, 2017

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are generally immune from civil liability so long as "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … To determine whether a government official is entitled to qualified immunity, we must ask (1) whether the official's action violated a constitutional right; and (2) whether the violated right was clearly established.

DeJesus v. Delaware

210 F. Supp. 3d 620 · District Court, D. Delaware · Sep 28, 2016

Government officials performing discretionary functions are generally immune from liability for civil damages when their conduct does “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … To establish a case that overcomes qualified immunity, a 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

Daniels v. Delaware

120 F. Supp. 2d 411 · District Court, D. Delaware · Sep 29, 2000

In interpreting the Anderson approach to the “clearly established right” prong of the qualified immunity test, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has *419 rejected a strict reading of Anderson which would require … However, the Hovater case is instructive on more than the “clearly established right” prong of the qualified immunity analysis.

Sanabria v. Martins

568 F. Supp. 2d 220 · District Court, D. Connecticut · Mar 26, 2008

not violated clearly established law.” … immunity, as a matter of well-established law.