Case law

Arthur Knight v. City of Miami

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 6, 2002

CARNES, Circuit Judge: This appeal by a law enforcement officer from the denial of qualified immunity presents us with these three issues: 1) whether there was an absence of probable cause for the officer’s arrest … Cannon, 174 F.3d 1271, 1283 n.3 (11th Cir. 1999) (“Arguable probable cause, not the higher standard of actual probable cause, governs the qualified immunity inquiry.”); Montoute v.

Kroll v. United States Capitol Police

683 F. Supp. 824 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 22, 1987

The Court now briefly elaborates on the claims of qualified immunity. … In Harlow the Supreme Court recognized that governmental officials may be entitled to qualified immunity “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Daryl L. Davis v. Barbara Knell

375 F.3d 703 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 14, 2004

“in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time [the actions were] taken.” … Clearly Established The second question that we must ask in our qualified immunity analysis is whether the constitutional right alleged to have been violated was clearly established. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201.

Johnson v. Bay Area Rapid Transit

790 F. Supp. 2d 1034 · District Court, N.D. California · May 10, 2011

The court, however, granted qualified immunity to MacPherson, stating that as of 2005, it was not clearly established that such use was unconstitutional. Id. at 833 . … Nor is Gee entitled to qualified immunity. The law as to extended detentions absent the indicia of probable cause was clearly established at the time of the incident.

Mitchell v. Street

415 F. Supp. 2d 490 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 16, 2005

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Finally, Defendant Mayor Street asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity. “Qualified immunity is available to government officials performing discretionary functions.” Lodato v. … If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.

Moran v. Greco

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 12, 2024

In denying summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, the district court concluded that “[i]t is clearly established that officers may not gratuitously inflict pain in a manner that is not a reasonable response to … Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201 (2001), the doctrine of qualified immunity protects a government official from liability unless he or she (1) “violated a constitutional [or federal statutory] right” that (2) “was clearly established

Smith v. OUR LADY OF LAKE HOSP.

639 So. 2d 730 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Sep 15, 1994

immunity, the language of the statute would have clearly reflected this intent." … Employing the former approach and tailoring the definition to fit the qualified immunity provision, courts have found that lack of malice or good faith can be proven by establishing a reasonable basis for the conduct.

Dehne v. City of Reno

222 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.

Colin A. Edwards v. Bryan C. Shanley

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 12, 2012

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages for torts committed while performing discretionary duties unless their conduct violates a clearly established statutory or constitutional … As a result, Officer Shanley cannot claim qualified immunity on the grounds that he did not know he was violating Edwards’s constitutional rights.5 In sum, we hold that clearly established federal law prohibits

Cunningham v. Baltimore Cnty.

246 Md. App. 630 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 1, 2020

The Supreme Court has stated that qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil damages liability “so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … The court found that Corporal Ruby was entitled to qualified immunity because his conduct did not violate “clearly established” constitutional rights.

Turturro v. City of New York

77 A.D.3d 732 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 12, 2010

The City contended, among other things, that it was entitled to qualified immunity for highway planning decisions made after adequate studies. … While its summary judgment motion was pending, the City made a separate motion, inter alia, for leave to amend its answer to add a defense of qualified immunity.

Kentucky v. Young

51 F. App'x 543 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 5, 2002

A state actor who is sued in his or her individual capacity is entitled to qualified immunity unless his or her actions violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Consequently, we hold that Detective Burns is not entitled to qualified immunity because her actions violated a clearly established constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known.

Stanfield v. City of Lima

244 F. Supp. 3d 638 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 24, 2017

Nevertheless, the doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from suit if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … The second inquiry, whether qualified immunity shields an officer from suit, depends on whether, at the time of the incident, “the right was clearly established ... in light of the specific context of the case, not as a broad

Sybil Hernandez v. Brett Jarman

340 F.3d 617 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 21, 2003

In this case, if Hernandez's allegations fail to establish a violation of a clearly established constitutional right, Jarman and Tarrell will be entitled to qualified immunity for their actions. See Saucier v. … Accordingly, Jarman is entitled to qualified immunity for his conduct because the facts as alleged by Hernandez fail to state a violation of Six Feathers's clearly established constitutional rights.

Terry Summers v. Simon Leis, Sheriff

368 F.3d 881 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 9, 2004

qualified immunity.” … of qualified immunity.

Moore v. City of Ferguson

213 F. Supp. 3d 1138 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Oct 4, 2016

“Qualified immunity is a defense available to government officials if they have not violated ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Amrine v. … Qualified immunity determinations are based on a two-part inquiry.

Michael-Ryan Kruger v. State of Nebraska

820 F.3d 295 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 7, 2016

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.... … Kruger’s proclaimed duty is not clearly established. There are two exceptions, neither of which applies here.

Huron Valley Hospital, Inc. v. City Of Pontiac

792 F.2d 563 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 30, 1986

This is not a simple conclusion that the law is clearly established as is necessary with qualified immunity. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), test for applying qualified immunity requires a finding that the official conduct "does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Johnson v. City of Ecorse

137 F. Supp. 2d 886 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 29, 2001

Qualified Immunity Officers Smith and Herring plead the defense of qualified immunity. … The standard for that defense is that governmental officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity, which shields them from civil damages, provided their conduct did not violate a clearly-established

Hermann v. Cook

240 F. Supp. 2d 626 · District Court, W.D. Kentucky · Jan 22, 2003

Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages where their conduct does “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Defendants bear the burden of pleading the qualified immunity defense, but Plaintiff bears the burden of showing that Defendants’ conduct violated a right so clearly established that a rea *630 sonable official would have