Case law

Danley v. Allen

540 F.3d 1298 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 22, 2008

To 8 overcome the defense of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show a constitutional or statutory violation and also that the right violated was clearly established at the … Ct. at 1085. 18  Having established a constitutional violation, the next step in the qualified immunity analysis usually is to determine whether the right was clearly

Dale E. Kraus and Rosetta M. Kraus, Husband and Wife Cindy D. Kraus, Individually and Todd W. Montgomery, Individually v. County of Pierce

793 F.2d 1105 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 17, 1986

The Supreme Court has noted, however, that qualified immunity “is an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability____” Mitchell v. … According to the test for qualified immunity established by the Supreme Court, the deputies in this case are immune from liability (and trial) if “their conduct [did] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Andrew M. Rohman v. New York City Transit Authority (Nycta), Carmen J. Bianco

215 F.3d 208 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 26, 2000

Resolution of those issues is not required to determine whether Bianco was entitled to qualified immunity because, if he is, immunity protects him irrespective of whether Rohman can establish the elements of malicious prosecution … clearly established at the time of the conduct; or (3) the defendant’s action was objectively legally reasonable in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.

McLaughlin v. CASLER

634 F. Supp. 2d 881 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 8, 2009

to qualified immunity. … with due process, and (3) the undisputed facts establish that Casler and Fritz are entitled to qualified immunity.

Preast v. McGill

65 F. Supp. 2d 395 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 10, 1999

clearly established at the time of the incident, and (3) evaluate whether a reasonable [official] would have understood that the conduct at issue violated the clearly established right.” … Qualified immunity shields Deputy Gainer “from suits for damages if ‘a reasonable officer could have believed [Preast’s arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information” ’ Deputy Gainer possessed

Bowser v. Blair County Children and Youth Services

346 F. Supp. 2d 788 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 18, 2004

The Third Circuit has discussed qualified immunity in the following manner and terms: A right is “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes only if “[t]he contours of the right” are “sufficiently clear that a reasonable … In determining whether qualified immunity is applicable, the Court must first determine for the purposes of the motion if, in fact, a constitutional right was violated, and second, if that right was “clearly established”

Hunt v. Massi

5 F. Supp. 3d 160 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 25, 2014

Overview of Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects public officials from civil liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , as long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights which … The Right was Clearly Established.

Casondra Pollreis v. Lamont Marzolf

66 F.4th 726 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Apr 27, 2023

“Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability unless his conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” Burns v. … “To defeat qualified immunity, Pollreis must prove that: ‘(1) the facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, demonstrate the deprivation of a constitutional or statutory right; and (2) the right was clearly

City of Alamo v. Holton

934 S.W.2d 833 · Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Dec 19, 1996

The City of Alamo appeals from an interlocutory order denying its motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … The terms "qualified immunity,” "official immunity," "quasi-judicial immunity,” "discretionary immunity” and "good faith immunity” refer to affirmative defenses available to governmental employees sued in their individual

Johnson v. City of Detroit

944 F. Supp. 586 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Oct 30, 1996

Government officials performing discretionary functions are afforded qualified immunity shielding them from civil liability under section 1983 if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Accordingly, the officer defendants cannot claim qualified immunity for their conduct on April 11, 1994 on the grounds that the right asserted in Johnson’s complaint is not clearly established.

Anthony v. Burkhart

28 F. Supp. 2d 1239 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 30, 1998

For the law to be clearly established to the point that qualified immunity does not apply, the law must have earlier been developed in such a concrete and factually defined context to make it obvious to all reasonable government … Once the qualified immunity defense is raised, Plaintiffs bear the burden of showing that the federal "rights” allegedly violated were “clearly established.” Barts v.

Donovan v. City of Milwaukee

845 F. Supp. 1312 · District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Nov 20, 1992

Qualified Immunity The individual defendants argue that they are protected from civil damages by the doctrine of qualified immunity. In Harlow v. … This court does not agree with Donovan that Gamer creates clearly established law with respect to the present action.

Atkins v. Township of Flint

94 F. App'x 342 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 9, 2004

Atkins clearly established constitutional right not to be arrested without probable cause and not to be subjected to excessive force. … Atkins could maintain a § 1983 action based on a violation of his clearly established right to be free from an arrest without a probable cause.

Spencer v. King County

39 Wash. App. 201 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 17, 1984

State officials are afforded a qualified immunity from liability under section 1983 insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established federal statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … At a minimum, the constitutional rights asserted by Spencer were not "clearly established" at the time of the challenged conduct.

Reed v. Multi-Cty. Juvenile Sys.

2010 Ohio 6602 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 30, 2010

To overcome the appellants' qualified-immunity defense, Reed must establish that the appellants' conduct violated a constitutional right and that the right was clearly established. Hope v. … Leonard (C.A.8, 2007), 477 F.3d 544, where qualified immunity was denied via summary judgment.

Hlad Ex Rel. Shipley v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Ass'n

305 F. Supp. 2d 830 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Feb 27, 2004

Qualified Immunity Under the qualified immunity doctrine, “government officials who perform discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … Accordingly, the Court concludes that, even if the qualified immunity doctrine applies to Defendant Carter, he has not established that he is entitled to application of qualified immunity at this stage of the litigation.

Strope v. Collins

492 F. Supp. 2d 1289 · District Court, D. Kansas · Jun 15, 2007

Qualified Immunity on Individual Capacity Claims Generally, government officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability for civil damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory … Accordingly, the current summary judgment record does not establish, at least at this procedural juncture, that defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.

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.

Estrada ex rel. Estate of Estrada v. Cook

166 F. Supp. 3d 1230 · District Court, D. New Mexico · Mar 16, 2015

“When a defendant asserts qualified immunity at summary judgment, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right and (2) the constitutional right was clearly established … are entitled to qualified immunity.”

Jasinski v. Glencoe Department of Public Safety

836 F. Supp. 2d 753 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 2, 2011

In determining whether a public official is protected by qualified immunity, I consider “whether a constitutional right has been violated,” and “whether the right was clearly established at the time the official acted.” … The defendants did not argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiffs’ excessive force claim.