Case law

Gunasekera v. Irwin

517 F. Supp. 2d 999 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 26, 2007

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity, or “good faith” immunity, is an affirmative defense that a defendant state official may raise. Siegert v. Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 231 , 111 S.Ct. 1789 , 114 L.Ed.2d 277 (1991). … Even if the Court found that Graduate Faculty status constitutes a protected property interest, this interest is not clearly established.

Figueroa-Rodriguez v. Lopez-Rivera

878 F.2d 1478 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Apr 25, 1989

Harlow, supra (government officials enjoy “qualified immunity” where the law does not “clearly” forbid their actions). … In Mendez-Palou, 813 F.2d at 1259 , this circuit said that the question in a “qualified immunity” case, such as this one, is “whether [at the time of dismissal] it was clearly established that employees in the particular

City of Brooksville v. Warner

533 S.W.3d 688 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Mar 17, 2017

Because the safe driving of a police vehicle is a ministerial act, Hause is not entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs negligent driving claim. … For this reason, and to ensure that governmental officials will exercise discretion when needed, our law allows qualified immunity from suit on the performance of discretionary acts.

Thomas Leonard v. Stephen Robinson, in His Individual Capacity

477 F.3d 347 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 2, 2007

Robinson has asserted the defense of qualified immunity. … “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

Jacobs v. West Feliciana Sheriff's Department

228 F.3d 388 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 2, 2000

To determine whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, we must determine: (1) whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right; and (2) if so, … As noted above, we have observed that at least since 1989, it has been clearly established that officials will only be liable for episodic acts or omissions resulting in the violation of a detainee’s clearly established

Blackshear v. City of Miami Beach

799 F. Supp. 2d 1338 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 26, 2011

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY STANDARD “[Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities as long as their conduct violates no clearly established statutory or constitutional … Defendant Wyatt is not entitled to qualified immunity.

Howes v. Hitchcock

66 F. Supp. 2d 203 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 9, 1999

conduct violated clearly established law.” … To prevail on their qualified immunity defense, the officers must first establish that a prudent police officer with the information they collectively possessed reasonably could have believed that probable cause to arrest

Damaris Rivera-Ruiz v. Leonardo Gonzalez-Rivera, Etc.

983 F.2d 332 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jan 5, 1993

Qualified Immunity Appellees’ suggest that as government officials, they are entitled to qualified immunity. The qualified immunity defense does not rescue appellees in this case. … However, government officials are not entitled to this defense if they violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable government official would have known. Harlow v.

Gooden v. Howard County Maryland

917 F.2d 1355 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Nov 9, 1990

A The defense of qualified immunity generally protects “government officials performing discretionary functions ... from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … was no clearly established law guiding their conduct.

DONNA SMITHERS v. TA'TANISHA TWEEDY

Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jun 24, 2025

“The doctrine of official immunity, also known as qualified immunity, offers public officers and employees limited protection from suit in their personal capacity.” (Citation omitted.) Siegrist v. Herhold, 365 Ga. … “Under Georgia law, official or qualified immunity is an entitlement not to stand trial rather than a mere defense to liability.

Ortiz v. Kazimer

811 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.

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.

Joseph McNeil John Blankenship, Kevin O'DOnnell and United States of America

187 F.3d 263 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 20, 1999

In denying that motion, the district court noted that to establish immunity from suit, the FAA officials must demonstrate that the right that plaintiff claims was violated was not “clearly established” at the time of the … Neither did it examine whether any such rights were clearly established at the time of the investigation.

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.

T.S. v. Gabbard

860 F. Supp. 2d 384 · District Court, E.D. Kentucky · May 9, 2012

On the other hand, the Defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity on the Plaintiffs’ claims because their actions, in executing the BRJDC Body ID process, did not violate clearly established statutory … Applying these standards in this case, it is the Plaintiffs who bear the burden of establishing that the Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Doe v. Ohio State Univ.

323 F. Supp. 3d 962 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 20, 2018

that right was clearly established.' " Miami Univ. , 882 F.3d at 604 (quoting Colvin v. … certainly clearly established at all times pertinent to this action....'

Adam Keup v. Nicholas Palmer

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 19, 2025

We will grant Deputy Palmer qualified immunity unless the facts demonstrate a deprivation of a constitutional right, and the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation. … And because qualified immunity is at issue, Keup must show that it was clearly established that what happened to him was a seizure. Dundon, 85 F.4th at 1255.

The Presbyterian Church (u.s.a.) v. The United States of America

870 F.2d 518 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 13, 1989

IV QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The district court held below that the individual INS agents named as defen *527 dants are entitled to qualified immunity. We agree. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, federal officials are immune from liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Lanigan v. Village of East Hazel Crest

913 F. Supp. 1202 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 26, 1996

“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials ... from damages unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” Elder v. … Additionally, the doctrine of qualified immunity shields all three officers because their conduct was not unreasonable in light of clearly established law at that time.

Surie Alexander v. Dau Nguyen

78 F.4th 1140 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 25, 2023

Nguyen was entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that his actions violated the Constitution. II. … Analysis A government official is entitled to qualified immunity “unless the plaintiff raises a genuine issue of fact showing (1) ‘a violation of a constitutional right,’ and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established