Case law

Gregorich v. Lund

54 F.3d 410 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 9, 1995

a “clearly established” constitutional right “of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Gregorich responds *414 that this right was clearly established. We review the district court’s decision to deny Justice Lund qualified immunity de novo. Bakalis, 35 F.3d at 322 . 2.

Chavez v. Illinois State Police

27 F. Supp. 2d 1053 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 5, 1998

To overcome a qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff must clear two separate hurdles. The plaintiff must show, first, that the right is, in fact, a clearly established right, Apostol v. … In the interests of completeness, the court will consider the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis and will assume, arguendo, that the plaintiffs have established that “freedom of movement” is a clearly established

Sova v. City of Mt. Pleasant

142 F.3d 898 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 24, 1998

LaLone and Officer Shell are entitled to qualified immunity. Police officers are afforded qualified immunity for their discretionary functions, Pierson v. … "Unless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery."

Justice v. Town of Blackwell

820 F.2d 238 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 29, 1987

he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Finally, the Town and Henkel contend that Cronin forfeited his qualified immunity by violating clearly established Wisconsin election law, Wis.Stats. § 6.92 et seq.

Lamle v. Eads

134 F.4th 562 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 9, 2025

Eads urged dismissal based on qualified immunity. 2 To avoid dismissal, the applicants needed to allege facts that would plausibly show the violation of a clearly established right. Robbins v. Okla. ex rel. … Given the lack of a clearly established constitutional violation, Ms. Eads was entitled to qualified immunity.

Jacob Doe v. The University of North Carolina System

133 F.4th 305 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 4, 2025

The two-part qualified immunity inquiry is well-settled. … We agree with the employee defendants that a right to cross-examination in this context has not, up to this point, been clearly enough established to deny them the protection of qualified immunity.

Harris Ex Rel. the Estate of Jkhary Craft v. Lasseigne

602 F. App'x 218 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 4, 2015

Lasseigne is entitled to qualified immunity if the court determines that his actions in shooting Craft “did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … It was clearly established at the time of the shooting that an officer violates the Fourth Amendment if he shoots a suspect without “probable cause to believe that the No. 14-1033 Harris v.

Foremost Insurance Co. v. Public Service Commission

985 S.W.2d 793 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 1998

Public officials are provided qualified immunity for their official acts “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Respondent argues that even if the facts alleged are true, Respondent did not violate any clearly established right of Appellant.

Verret v. Alabama Department of Mental Health

511 F. Supp. 2d 1166 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Sep 20, 2007

“Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Consequently, this Court will follow the binding precedent established by Davis and hold that Waters’ violation of policy 20-16 does not forfeit her right to qualified immunity. b.

Stack v. Killian

96 F.3d 159 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 12, 1996

Officials who perform discretionary functions are generally entitled to qualified immunity from individual liability for civil damages so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … The question of whether an official is protected by qualified immunity turns on the objective legal reasonableness of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were "clearly established" at the time it was taken

Ellison v. Hobbs

334 F. Supp. 3d 1328 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Sep 25, 2018

"In evaluating a government actor's entitlement to qualified immunity, the Supreme Court has developed an objective-reasonableness test wherein 'the official's actions must be evaluated against "clearly established law," … Second, we determine whether that right was clearly established at the time of alleged conduct.

Jodie Smook v. Minnehaha County

457 F.3d 806 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 9, 2006

a violation of clearly established constitutional law. … The court further held that Banbury and Cheever were not entitled to qualified immunity because it was “clearly established for several years” prior to the time of the alleged violations that the Fourth Amendment prohibited

Barnes v. County of Placer

654 F. Supp. 2d 1066 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 30, 2009

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity is a defense to lawsuits against governmental officials arising out of the performance of their duties. … without first obtaining a warrant and keep them in custody until the Placer County Juvenile Court ordered their release did not violate clearly established law.

Hazel L. Wilson v. Steve Northcutt, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Mayor of the City of Malvern, Arkansas, City of Malvern, Arkansas

441 F.3d 586 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 21, 2006

Qualified immunity protects government officials from the costs of trial and the burdens of broad discovery unless their discretionary acts violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. Harlow v. … Northcutt is entitled to qualified immunity. C. Towing the Café Fish.

Slough v. Telb

644 F. Supp. 2d 978 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 14, 2009

Qualified immunity protects public officials from suit for civil damages so long as their- conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … No clearly established constitutional right was violated by Defendants entry into Plaintiffs home. Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity in entering Plaintiffs home. b.

Forest v. Pawtucket Police Department

290 F. Supp. 2d 215 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Oct 22, 2003

The Doctrine of Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established … If the court finds the parties’ submissions demonstrate a constitutional violation, the next step is to determine whether the right was clearly established. Id.

Matthew Grab v. Columbia Borough

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 21, 2023

Grab and Grab’s “right not to be handcuffed was clearly established.” … But the District Court did not resolve the first step in the qualified immunity analysis, concluding instead that the right was not “clearly established.” See Pearson v.

Stephen Hanes v. Thomas Zurick

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 18, 2009

the court indicated that the right was clearly established. … was not clearly established at the time of the alleged conduct.

Keith Edwards v. Officer J. Grubbs

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 13, 2026

Edwards to establish that qualified immunity does not apply. See Bailey, 843 F.3d at 480. … A right may be clearly established for qualified im- munity purposes in one of three ways: (1) case law with indistinguishable facts clearly establishing the constitutional right;

Neu v. Corcoran

869 F.2d 662 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 3, 1989

We therefore have jurisdiction to review the immunity ruling. 8 2. Qualified Immunity. … Qualified immunity shields officials 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 known."