Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.51s
Meredith v. Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Commission
177 F.3d 1042 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 4, 1999
Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) (restricting qualified immunity protection to actions where official conduct did not violate a clearly established legal right), such immunity does not extend to a suit seeking equitable … of a clearly established right, the lexical priority of the inquiries are identical.
Cited 59 timesPublished436 F. Supp. 2d 83 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 30, 2006
However, “[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 would … her clearly established Fourth Amendment rights under color of state law.
Cited 14 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · Jan 23, 2026
A two-step inquiry applies to a qualified-immunity defense: 1) whether the plaintiff has alleged facts to show a violation of a constitutional right, and 2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the … Hall, 828 F.3d 298, 305 (4th Cir. 2016) (officer entitled to qualified immunity where plaintiff had not directed court to any case that would have clearly warmed officer that conduct violated First Amendment rights)).
Cited 0 timesUnknown618 F. Supp. 2d 124 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Mar 31, 2009
Defendant Burgos’s right to qualified immunity The defense of qualified immunity shields “public officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Therefore, the first step to ascertain if Burgos is entitled to a defense of qualified immunity is whether Plaintiffs’ allegations claim a violation of clearly established law.
Cited 2 timesPublished222 F. App'x 560 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 20, 2007
In this appeal, Dehne objects to the district court’s grant of qualified immunity to Griffin. 1 Public officials are entitled to qualified immunity for acts that do not violate clearly established constitutional rights of … If an official “could have believed, ‘reasonably but mistakenly ... that his or her conduct did not violate a clearly established constitutional right,’ ” then qualified immunity applies. Skoog v.
Cited 3 timesPublished572 F. Supp. 2d 446 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 27, 2008
“[Pjublic officials ... are protected by qualified immunity from civil liability for actions taken in their official capacity, if those actions were objectively reasonable in light of clearly established rules then extant … “Hence, a defendant is not liable 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.”
Cited 3 timesPublished117 P.3d 316 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 28, 2005
This suggests the law was clearly established at the time the current warrant was sought and the defendants would not have been entitled to qualified immunity. … However, I disagree the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because they did not violate a "clearly established" right.
Superseded by statute, as recognized in Wright v. TerrellCited 27 timesPublishedBrigitte Wright v. Tony E. Sims
417 F.3d 879 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 8, 2005
Qualified Immunity “Government officials who perform discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity unless their alleged conduct violated clearly established federal constitutional or statutory rights of which … If the answer is no, we grant qualified immunity. If the answer is yes, we go on to determine “whether the right was clearly established.” Id.
Cited 1 timesPublished462 S.W.3d 719 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · May 15, 2015
The teacher was not entitled to qualified official immunity. Id. … Mucker is not entitled to qualified official immunity.
Cited 3 timesPublished12 F. App'x 193 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 3, 2001
a given set of facts violates clearly established law.” ’ Id. … As discussed above, evaluation of a qualified immunity claim involves answering two questions: 1) did the plaintiff suffer a deprivation of his clearly established constitutional rights; and 2) did the defendant act in an
Cited 7 timesPublished865 F.2d 827 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 4, 1989
MATHIS’S QUALIFIED IMMUNITY (RACE DISCRIMINATION) Mathis finally contends that he is immune from damages under the doctrine of qualified “good faith” immunity set forth in Harlow v. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability for civil damages in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless their conduct violated “clearly
Cited 121 timesPublished42 F. Supp. 3d 310 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 8, 2014
any of Brown’s “clearly established” constitutional rights. … Qualified immunity attaches to discretionary conduct of government officials that “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.
Cited 1 timesPublished916 F.2d 1029 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 11, 1990
Hopkins must persuade that Stice deprived him of a protectible property or liberty interest without due process of law, and, because Stice as a public official is protected by qualified immunity, that Stice violated a clearly … Public officials are, of course, immune from liability unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory norm, a question not necessarily answered by the certainty of the legal rule.
Cited 14 timesPublishedDarrell Siggers-El v. David Barlow
412 F.3d 693 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 24, 2005
The Defendant moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity, arguing that it was not clearly established that 1) a prisoner engages in protected conduct when he complains about a prison officer’s failure to … The only issue presented in this appeal is whether the district court erred in denying Defendant Barlow qualified immunity.
Cited 170 timesPublished817 F. Supp. 1520 · District Court, D. Kansas · Mar 25, 1993
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 … -Once the defendant has successfully raised the qualified immunity defense, plaintiff must come “forward with facts or allegations to show both that the defendants’ alleged conduct violated the law and that the law was clearly
Cited 13 timesPublishedBailey v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 69 of Canadian Cnty. Okla.
896 F.3d 1176 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 24, 2018
Nonetheless, we affirm the district court's grant of qualified immunity to school superintendent Sean McDaniel because the law was not previously clearly established on this issue. … We AFFIRM the district court's conclusion that McDaniel is entitled to qualified immunity, on the alternative ground that the law at issue was not clearly established at the time he violated it.
Cited 23 timesPublishedMeadours Ex Rel. Estate of Meadours v. Ermel
483 F.3d 417 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 3, 2007
The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability "‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established . . . constitutional rights of which … Second, we determine whether the officers' conduct was objectively reasonable in light of "clearly established" law at the time of the alleged violation. Goodson v.
Cited 143 timesPublished838 F.2d 1031 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 22, 1988
Clearly Established in General 47 In Harlow v. … Qualified immunity is not a defense in such cases.
Cited 9 timesPublished130 F.3d 96 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 21, 1998
Disputes over the application of the clearly-established-law prong of the qualified-immunity inquiry are separable from the merits of a controversy because “‘[a]n appellate court reviewing the denial of the defendant … The semantic switch from discussing the typical qualified-immunity issue of “clearly established law” to a hypothetical (in Behrens) issue of “objective legal reasonableness” creates many of the problems that are now plaguing
Cited 1 timesPublished811 F.3d 848 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 4, 2016
This use of force was clearly established as excessive before 2010. … His lack of action on this record establishes a cognizable claim that he violated Juan’s clearly established constitutional rights. State-law claims.
Cited 17 timesPublished
Ask Donna