Case law

Michael W. Showers v. Steven A. Spangler

182 F.3d 165 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 29, 1999

"[G]overnment officials performing discretionary functions generally are granted a qualified immunity and are `shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … entitled to qualified immunity.

Maxcie Thomas v. Houston Talley

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 25, 2001

Qualified immunity "shield[s] [government 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 … immunity ... typically, the issue whether the federal right allegedly infringed was 'clearly established' " (emphasis in original).

Grancio v. De Vecchio

608 F. Supp. 2d 362 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 27, 2009

Grancio’s favor) clearly establish these Defendants’ direct involvement in the murder of Nicholas Grancio in concert with Scarpa their informant and, demonstrate unequivocally a violation of the by then clearly established … Qualified Immunity A government official is entitled to qualified immunity “if he did not violate clearly established law or it was objectively reasonable for him to believe that he was not violating clearly established law

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.

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.

M.P., a Minor v. Monroe Local Schools

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2021

"An official sued under §1983 is entitled to qualified immunity unless it is shown that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was 'clearly established' at the time of the challenged conduct." … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982) (Qualified immunity shields "government officials performing discretionary functions . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

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.

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.

Charles Bella v. Lee Chamberlain and Curtis Meyers

24 F.3d 1251 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · May 20, 1994

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 rights of … The very purpose of qualified immunity is to "weed out” suits that fail to assert the violation of a clearly established constitutional right "without requiring a defendant ... to engage in expensive and time consuming preparation

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

Allen v. Sakai

48 F.3d 1082 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 1, 1995

established constitutional rights, defeating defendants' claims to qualified immunity. … established constitutional rights, defeating defendants' claims to qualified immunity.

Rodriguez v. State

218 Md. App. 573 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Aug 27, 2014

If the official can establish those two factors, he receives qualified immunity, that is, immunity in the absence of malice. 135 Md. App. at 719 (emphasis added). … Moreover, the Court held that, because the trustees “were clearly not public officials,” it was plain that “the concept of qualified public official immunity is inapplicable to their actions in connection with the judicial

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.

Munn-Goins v. Board of Trustees of Bladen Community College

658 F. Supp. 2d 713 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 17, 2009

Page contend that qualified immunity bars plaintiffs section 1983 claim for money damages. … , 119 S.Ct. 1692 . *725 In most cases, the qualified immunity analysis does not require factual findings, because the inquiry is a “purely legal one: whether the facts alleged ... support a claim of violation of clearly

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.

Mabe v. San Bernardino County

237 F.3d 1101 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 24, 2001

Zolin, 812 F.2d 1103 (9th Cir. 1987). 14 Whether governing law was clearly established is a legal determination reviewed de novo. Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 528 (1985) (qualified immunity). … Arizona, 437 U.S. 385, 393 (1978)). 23 The first prong of the qualified immunity test focuses on whether the law governing Perry's removal of MD from the Mabe home was clearly established.

Ballantyne v. Champion Builders, Inc.

47 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 852 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 9, 2004

Federal courts recognize a qualified immunity for public officials, which is analogous although not identical to our official immunity. … Qualified immunity protects governmental officers with discretionary authority from liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

Glaspie v. Mahoney

973 F. Supp. 401 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 20, 1997

from constitutional tort liability; and that defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. 10 See Defts.’ … DISCUSSION Qualified Immunity The Supreme Court has clearly defined those situations where government officials enjoy qualified immunity in performing discretionary functions: [T]he[se] defendants enjoy a qualified immunity

State of New Jersey v. C.C.W.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 29, 2025

However, to qualify for the OPA immunity, a defendant must also establish that the acute condition "result[ed] from the consumption or use of a [CDS]." Ibid. … The definition is comprised of three elements, all of which must be established to qualify for immunity: (1) the person must exhibit an "acute condition[,]" (2) "the acute condition must be 'resulting from the consumption