Case law

Webb v. Jackson

583 So. 2d 946 · Mississippi Supreme Court · Jun 26, 1991

As to that section of the Complaint, Officer Jackson enjoys qualified immunity since the misconduct alleged does not fall within one of the three exceptions to qualified immunity. … Officer Jackson is protected by qualified immunity and the City of Newton by sovereign immunity on that issue.

Lawrence v. United States

340 F.3d 952 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 21, 2003

Qualified Immunity 8 A district court's decision to grant summary judgment on the grounds of qualified immunity is reviewed de novo. Case v. Kitsap County Sheriff's Dep't, 249 F.3d 921 , 925 (9th Cir.2001). … If the right is not clearly established, the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. Id.

Pearlie Gambrel v. Knox Cnty., Ky.

25 F.4th 391 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 8, 2022

Even so, our caselaw did not clearly establish that the Officers acted unconstitutionally when using this force. Since we may address the two-part qualified-immunity test in either order, see Pearson v. … This conclusion leads to the second qualified-immunity question: Even under Gambrel’s version of events, would Ashurst’s shooting violate clearly established law?

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).

Long v. Morris

485 F. Supp. 2d 1247 · District Court, D. Kansas · May 3, 2007

Analysis Defendant seeks qualified immunity on plaintiffs claim of excessive force. … Ordinarily, in order for plaintiff to demonstrate that a law is clearly established, “there must be a Supreme Court or Tenth Circuit decision on point, or the clearly established weight of authority from other courts must

Buchanan v. Metz

6 F. Supp. 3d 730 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Jul 15, 2014

Bogle, 92 Fed.Appx. 165, 169 (6th Cir.2004) (“Although a request for monetary damages alone may not suffice to establish the requisite notice, the assertion of a qualified-immunity defense (even a contingent qualified-immunity … These functions clearly relate to the decision to prosecute, to which absolute immunity absolutely applies.

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

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.

Liffiton v. Keuker

850 F.2d 73 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 21, 1988

Even if they are not entitled to absolute immunity, they may be entitled to qualified immunity if their actions were objectively reasonable under clearly established law. Harlow v. … Such an action is neither clearly prosecutorial in nature, entitling him to absolute immunity, nor objectively reasonable under clearly established law, entitling him to qualified immunity. 24 Therefore, the complaint states

Webb v. Jessamine County Fiscal Court

802 F. Supp. 2d 870 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · Aug 5, 2011

To avoid summary judgment based on an assertion of qualified immunity, Plaintiff must first show “a violation of a constitutional right” and that the violated right “was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the defendant’ … Summary judgment is, thus, precluded on the basis of qualified immunity for Teaven so long as the violated right “was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.” Pearson v.

Harhay v. Town of Ellington Board of Education

323 F.3d 206 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Mar 21, 2003

Public officials enjoy qualified immunity from suit for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for acts undertaken in their official capacity, unless their conduct violates clearly established constitutional rights of which an objectively … Defendants may benefit from qualified immunity if plaintiff is unable to establish any of these three *212 steps.

Marin v. Gonzales, et al.

2005 DNH 167 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Dec 19, 2005

Qualified Immunity. … Qualified immunity protects "government officials performing discretionary functions . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

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.

Willis v. Arp

165 F. Supp. 3d 1357 · District Court, N.D. Georgia · Feb 29, 2016

Officials seeking qualified immunity must first establish that they were acting within their discretionary authority when the alleged constitutional violation occurred. Lewis v. City of W. … Second, Plaintiff must show that “the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.” Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232 , 129 S.Ct. 808 (quoting Saucier v.

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.

Moore v. Lightfoot

286 F. App'x 844 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 27, 2008

Under the second prong of the qualified immunity test, however, we find that Guyton’s actions were objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law. Guyton took measures to protect Moore from danger. … Guyton is, therefore, entitled to qualified immunity. B.

Willoughby v. Luster

717 F. Supp. 1439 · District Court, D. Nevada · May 2, 1989

On the basis of these affidavits, they argue that they are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity. … This finding, however, does not preclude defendants from renewing their claim of qualified immunity after the factual circumstances surrounding Willoughby’s disciplinary hearing have been more fully established.

Sarah Wilson v. Eric Gregory

3 F. 4th 844 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 1, 2021

But in this case, our federal qualified immunity analysis turns on the “clearly established” prong. … because Ohio statutory immunity does not turn on whether a particular right was clearly established.

Helms v. Rafter

853 F. Supp. 897 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 14, 1994

Qualified Immunity Public officials are free from liability for monetary damages if they can plead and prove that their conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … If it is undisputed that the right allegedly violated was clearly established at the time, the defendant asserting a qualified immunity defense may still be immune from damages for violation of that right if, under the circumstances

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.