Case law

McSean

District 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)).

Lloyd v. Stone Harbor

179 N.J. Super. 496 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 1, 1981

In the present case the individual defendants are not protected by the defense of qualified immunity. … As noted, under Monell and Owen, supra, municipalities have no immunity in suits commenced under the federal Civil Rights Act; individuals have qualified immunity.

CUEBAS v. Davila

618 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.

Millender v. County of Los Angeles

564 F.3d 1143 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 6, 2009

If the answer to the first inquiry is yes, the second inquiry is whether the right was clearly established: in other words, “whether it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation … The district court’s denial of qualified immunity is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED with instructions to grant Detective Messerschmidt and Sergeant Lawrence qualified immunity on the challenged scope of the warrant. .

Hernandez v. Selsky

572 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.”

Bosteder v. City of Renton

117 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.

Joann Cavalieri, as Plenary Guardian of the Estate of Steven Cavalieri, a Disabled Person v. Donald Shepard

321 F.3d 616 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 20, 2003

asserting was not clearly established at the time of these events. … Ryan, 957 F.2d 402, 406 (7th Cir.1992), was clearly established prior to 1998.

Jeffrey Davis v. Bim Lowers

132 F. App'x 302 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 23, 2005

Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c).2 Qualified immunity protects from liability government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … The burden then shifts to Davis to show that qualified immunity is not appropriate. The threshold inquiry is whether Davis’s allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation. Id.

Mucker v. Brown

462 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.

Kitt v. Bailey

676 F. App'x 350 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 14, 2017

Because McCreary invoked the defense of qualified immunity, Kitt must also negate that defense by pleading facts to show a violation of a right that was clearly established at the time of the incident and that, in light of … that clearly established law, the defendant’s conduct was objectively unreasonable.

Gratsch v. Hamilton County

12 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

Cygnar v. City of Chicago

865 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

Allen Hopkins, Cross-Appellant v. John E. Stice and Texas Dept. Of Corrections, John E. Stice, Cross-Appellee

916 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.

Dormu v. District of Columbia

795 F. Supp. 2d 7 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 7, 2011

If no constitutional right was violated, qualified immunity is appropriate. Id. … Under the second step of the qualified immunity analysis, the officers would nonetheless be immune from suit if Dormu’s Fourth Amendment rights were not clearly established at the time of the arrest.

Burgess v. West

817 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

Hobart v. City of Stafford

784 F. Supp. 2d 732 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 29, 2011

Officials sued in their individual capacities are protected by qualified immunity unless the act violates a constitutional right clearly established at the time. Sanchez v. Swyden, 139 F.3d 464, 466-467 (5th Cir.1998). … To determine whether the plaintiff has overcome the presumption of qualified immunity, the Court first considers whether the plaintiff has proven a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Collins v.

Albright v. Texas Department of Human Services

859 S.W.2d 575 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Jul 29, 1993

Clearly, the legislature contemplated that summary judgment is the appropriate procedure in which to determine official immunity. And in his concurrence in Travis v. … School Dist., 894 F.2d 174 , 177 (5th Cir.1990) (because the defense of qualified immunity is immunity from suit, which extends beyond just a defense to include all aspects of civil litigation, qualified immunity questions

Mann v. Palmerton Area School District

189 F. Supp. 3d 467 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 2, 2016

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that even if Plaintiffs can establish their state-created danger claim, Coach Walkowiak is entitled to qualified immunity. … In analyzing whether the coach was entitled to qualified immunity, the Third Circuit explained that although district court opinions “may be relevant to the determination of when a right was clearly established for qualified

Ex Parte Turner

840 So. 2d 132 · Supreme Court of Alabama · Jun 21, 2002

and qualified immunity. … Turner's affidavit provides uncontroverted sworn statements that sufficiently establish qualified immunity from the § 1983 action.

Winfield v. G.L. Bass

106 F.3d 525 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 31, 1997

Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages to the extent that “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … No clearly established law having been violated, the prison officials were entitled to qualified immunity. 5 IV.