Case law

Brian Thomas Hoyland v. Shawn McMenomy

869 F.3d 644 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 28, 2017

established law.” … ... right; and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

Lyons v. CITY OF XENIA. OH

258 F. Supp. 2d 761 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 22, 2003

While it is clearly established that one has the right to be free from arrest not supported by probable cause, the more narrowly focused question for purposes of qualified immunity is whether Officer Keith reasonably could … With respect to Officer Foubert, evidence of excessively forceful handcuffing precludes protection by qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage of litigation, as the right to be free from such is clearly established

Tzilianos v. New York City Transit Authority

91 A.D.3d 435 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 5, 2012

Defendant failed to establish either that compliance with its six-inch gap standard proves that it was not negligent or that it is entitled to qualified immunity In support of its argument that it is entitled to qualified … In Jackson , this Court enunciated that, “[i]n order to establish entitlement to qualified immunity, the defendant must demonstrate that a public planning body considered and passed upon the same question of risk as would

Holguin v. Lopez

584 F. Supp. 2d 921 · District Court, W.D. Texas · Oct 28, 2008

However, qualified immunity shields state actors performing discretionary functions from liability unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … “Texas law of official immunity is substantially the same as federal qualified immunity law.” Wren v. Towe, 130 F.3d 1154, 1160 (5th Cir.1997).

Edward Ray, Jr. v. E. Lara

31 F.4th 692 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 11, 2022

It has long been established that prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity from damages suits under § 1983 for activities that are “intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process.” Imbler v. … LARA that Ray does not qualify for the imminent danger exception to § 1915(g). 9 IV Because Ray has both accumulated three strikes and failed to establish a sufficient nexus between

Hill v. Walsh

884 F.3d 16 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 27, 2018

Because the law on the emergency aid exception to the warrant requirement was not clearly established at the time of the incident, we uphold the district court's entry of judgment based on qualified immunity. … The district court also noted that even if the officers had violated the Fourth Amendment, they had a "strong case" that they were entitled to qualified immunity because "there is no clearly established Supreme

Duncan v. Goedeke & Cleasey

837 F. Supp. 846 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 22, 1993

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, federal officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … In order to overcome a defendant official’s qualified immunity from Bivens suits, a plaintiff claiming violation of constitutional rights must first show that these rights were clearly established at the time of the conduct

Dudley v. Angel

209 F.3d 460 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 25, 2000

Therefore, Dudley must overcome the defendants’ claims of qualified immunity, by first showing a violation of clearly established federal rights. Sorenson v. … The first step of the qualified immunity analysis is subdivided into three questions: (1) whether a constitutional violation is alleged; (2) whether the law regarding the alleged violation was clearly established at the

Doak Walker and Maurice Turner v. R. Schaeffer, Patrolman, and J. Sheridan, Patrolman

854 F.2d 138 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 12, 1988

allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery. … We find this to be a sound basis for the claim of qualified immunity here.

Batten v. Gomez

324 F.3d 288 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 24, 2003

suit under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … We have reviewed this claim and agree with the district court that Shuster and Gomez are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim because Shuster and Gomez violated no clearly established right held by Brittany.

Richard E. Maul v. Dr. Evan Constan, Anthony Metzcus, and Richard Gore

928 F.2d 784 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 1, 1991

The defendants clearly did not press a qualified immunity defense in any pretrial motions, at the pretrial conference, or at trial. … Aquino, 863 F.2d 1037 , 1041 n. 5 (1st Cir.1988), which says that a defendant “who has appropriately pleaded the affirmative defense of qualified immunity may establish his right to immunity at any point in the proceedings

Jones v. Butt

643 F. App'x 926 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 25, 2016

The burden then shifts to the plaintiff to “overcome the defendant’s privilege” by proving that the defendant violated a federal constitutional or statutory right that was “clearly established” at the time of the defendant … It is clearly established that “an arrest without probable cause violates the right to be free from an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment.”

Estate of Jaquez v. City of New York

104 F. Supp. 3d 414 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 8, 2015

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY A. … “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects 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

Roe v. City of Milwaukee

26 F. Supp. 2d 1119 · District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Nov 2, 1998

Unless the constitutionality of the defendants’ conduct was clearly established in 1997—when they allegedly committed these acts—the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … to review the district court’s denial of qualified immunity.

Chayo v. Kaladjian

844 F. Supp. 163 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 9, 1994

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity shields government officials whose “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known” Harlow v. … Accord Harlow, 457 U.S. at 819 , 102 S.Ct. at 2739 (stating that test for qualified immunity “focuses on the objective legal reasonableness of an official’s acts” in light of “clearly established” legal rules); Ying Jing

Komlosi v. New York State Office of Mental Retardation & Developmental Disabilities

64 F.3d 810 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 7, 1995

Qualified Immunity. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from personal liability if their conduct either “ ‘did not violate “clearly established rights” of which a reasonable person would have known, or ... it was

Cartwright Ex Rel. Estate of Cartwright v. City of Marine

336 F.3d 487 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 21, 2003

No. 02-1728 qualified immunity. … Then, the 295, 299 (6th cir. 1999) (noting that as long as “a defendant court must discern whether the right is so “clearly seeking qualified immunity [is] willing to concede to the facts established” that a “reasonable

Thomas v. City of Annapolis

113 Md. App. 440 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 31, 1997

If those three conditions are met, the public official enjoys a qualified immunity in the absence of “malice.” … The parties herein do not always clearly distinguish between immunity and privilege.

Harrell v. State

170 Wash. App. 386 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 28, 2012

Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232 . … and Richards enjoyed qualified immunity.

Gomez Candelaria v. Rivera Rodríguez

218 F. Supp. 2d 66 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Feb 25, 2002

The general rule regarding qualified immunity is that government officials are immune from suit and liability when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory authority or constitutional rights, which a reasonable … Accordingly, they argue that Defendants are not immune from liability since their unconstitutional actions occurred when the law regarding patronage dismissals was “clearly established”.