Case law

Frank Zavaro v. Thomas A. Coughlin, Iii, C.R. Homrighouse

970 F.2d 1148 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 31, 1992

We have previously articulated the standard for establishing a defense of qualified immunity. … Coughlin, 774 F.Supp. 189, 199-200 (S.D.N.Y.1991) (holding that a hearing officer is not entitled to qualified immunity for *1154 violating inmate’s clearly established right to an independent assessment of informants’ reliability

Doe v. Hamilton Cnty. Bd. of Educ.

329 F. Supp. 3d 543 · District Court, E.D. Tennessee · Aug 6, 2018

unreasonable in light of the clearly established constitutional right." … To overcome qualified immunity, the plaintiff must demonstrate the right allegedly violated was "clearly established" at the time of the violation. Pearson , 555 U.S. at 236 , 129 S.Ct. 808 .

Stanley Joseph v. Kenneth Allen

712 F.3d 1222 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 15, 2013

Qualified immunity shields law enforcement officers from suit if they “[did] not violate [a] clearly established statutory or constitutional right[] of which a reasonable person would have known.” Gorra v. … However, qualified immunity allows officers to make reasonable errors, Habiger v.

Brown Ex Rel. Estate of Brown v. Chapman

814 F.3d 436 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 19, 2016

The officers asserted that they were entitled to qualified immunity, and the City asserted that plaintiff could not establish municipal liability. Id. at 1 (Page ID #97). … If, for example, “the [City] ratified [the officers’] misconduct which, though unconstitutional, was not in violation of clearly-established law,” a court could find the officers immune but the City liable. Baker v.

Massi v. Flynn

254 F. App'x 84 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 16, 2007

Our jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine is limited to whether, as a matter of law, Flynn is entitled to qualified immunity “either because the law was not clearly established or because, on the facts assumed … Instead, we ask only “whether the facts alleged ... support a claim of violation of clearly established law.” Id. at 528 n. 9, 105 S.Ct. 2806 .

Clay v. Board of Trustees of Neosho County Community College

905 F. Supp. 1488 · District Court, D. Kansas · Oct 13, 1995

To summarize, public officials enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … A claim of qualified immunity is analyzed as follows: Once a claim of qualified immunity is adequately raised by a defendant, the plaintiff must “show that the law was clearly established when the alleged violation occurred

Losch v. Borough Of Parkesburg

736 F.2d 903 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 14, 1984

Kleindienst, 729 F.2d 267, 273 (3d Cir.1984). 26 Qualified immunity protects a defendant who failed to observe a right or a legal standard that was not clearly established when the defendant acted. … On the other hand, as the Harlow Court concluded, "[i]f the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail," unless the defendant "claims extraordinary circumstances and can prove that he neither

Sabrina Jordan v. John Howard

987 F.3d 537 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 3, 2021

a genuine dispute of material fact for trial and that the officers were protected by qualified immunity—because they did not violate McShann’s clearly established rights by using deadly force in response to threatened deadly … The district court found that Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate McShann’s clearly established constitutional rights and their use of deadly force was objectively reasonable.

Starr v. Warden, et al.

2006 DNH 110 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Sep 27, 2006

Qualified Immunity. … A government official is entitled to qualified immunity from personal liability if the challenged "■'conduct [did] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Don Meadows v. Rockford Housing Authority

861 F.3d 672 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 30, 2017

Qualified immunity protects state officials from liability for civil damages unless the plaintiff can show “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established … A right is clearly established when existing precedent has placed the right’s existence “beyond debate.” Reichle v. Howards, 132 S. Ct. 2088, 2093 (2012).

April Sabbe v. Washington Cnty Bd of Comm'rs

84 F.4th 807 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 17, 2023

“Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” White v. … I would hold that Defendants’ entry onto Sabbe’s property was a clearly established violation of the Fourth Amendment, as to which Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Mandola v. County of Nassau

222 F. Supp. 3d 203 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2016

and qualified immunity doctrines. … Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

King v. Ambs

519 F.3d 607 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 21, 2008

“Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … When considering a claim of qualified immunity, “[t]he relevant, dispositive inquiry in determining whether a right is clearly established is whether it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful

Stephen Buckley v. J. Michael Fitzsimmons

20 F.3d 789 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 7, 1994

a particular right was not “clearly established” at the time of the defendant’s acts because it was and is not “established” at all. … Thus there cannot be absolute immunity. But qualified immunity is available unless the acts violated “clearly established” constitutional norms. Harlow, 467 U.S. at 818, 102 S.Ct. at 2738 ; Anderson v.

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

David L. McCartney, M.D. Darryl Williams, M.D. And Dorma Kohler v. Donald R. May, M.D.

Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo) · Jun 7, 2001

overcome their entitlement to qualified immunity. … (footnote: 4) Appellants have failed to conclusively establish McCartney and Williams’s qualified immunity on May’s substantive due process claims.

James Dean v. County of Gage

807 F.3d 931 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 7, 2015

It also denied the officers’ renewed motion for qualified immunity, which they cross-appeal. II. The officers claim they are entitled to qualified immunity. … To overcome qualified immunity, plaintiffs must demonstrate both that “(1) there was a deprivation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.”

Hilliard v. City & County of Denver

930 F.2d 1516 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 24, 1991

This case is an appeal by defendant police officers from the denial of their motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … The defendants moved to dismiss, arguing that the law controlling their actions was not clearly established, and that they therefore had qualified immunity from suit. 1 The district court dismissed all of the plaintiff’s

Daniel Scott v. Mary Benson

742 F.3d 335 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 4, 2014

To determine whether qualified immunity applies, we ask “(1) whether the facts alleged or shown, construed in the light most favorable to [Scott], establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right,” and “(2) whether … that constitutional right was clearly established as of [the time of the relevant conduct], such that a reasonable official would have known that [her] actions were unlawful.”

Brett C. Kimberlin v. Michael J. Quinlan

6 F.3d 789 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 8, 1993

Since then the Court has made it clear that qualified immunity should be granted, and suit dismissed, where the plaintiff “not only failed to allege the violation of a constitutional right that was clearly established at … More recently, in Siegert , we clearly explained how the standard applies to a summary judgment motion based on qualified immunity: Where the defendant’s subjective intent is an essential component of plaintiffs claim, once