Case law

Doe v. Bobbitt

881 F.2d 510 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 9, 1989

The sole issue on appeal is whether the defendants are entitled to summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, public officials performing discretionary functions are protected against suits for damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of

United Food and Commercial Workers, Afl-Cio, Clc, Local No. 88 v. Shop 'N Save Warehouse Foods, Inc.

113 F.3d 893 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 16, 1997

above, an employee, upon returning to work with a doctor’s release indicating physical fitness to return to work, shall be placed in the same job classification, seniority permitting, and shall receive the rate of pay then established

Corey Fisherman v. David Launderville

100 F.4th 978 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 6, 2024

And second, was the right clearly established at the time? See id. If either answer is no, then qualified immunity applies. A. … Bowersox, 526 F.3d 1186, 1188 (8th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (denying qualified immunity); see Munz v.

Vives v. The City Of New York

405 F.3d 115 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 29, 2005

Normally, it is only after making such a determination that a court should ask whether the right allegedly implicated was clearly established at the time of the events in question." County of Sacramento v. … any qualified immunity claim.

Richardson v. City of St. Louis

293 S.W.3d 133 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Sep 22, 2009

Burrow’s defense of official immunity is not clearly established by the petition. Arguing, in essence, that the petition does not clearly establish that official immunity bars the claim against Mr. … Because the facts of the petition alone are not adequate to clearly establish the defense of official immunity, the trial court erred in granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss Mr.

Gross v. Pirtle

245 F.3d 1151 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 9, 2001

An order denying summary judgment based on qualified immunity necessarily involves a legal determination that certain alleged actions violate clearly established law. Id. at 313. … Gross, we conclude he has failed to establish that Deputy Pirtle’s actions constituted excessive force, and Deputy Pirtle is therefore entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law.

Danny Ray Heggen v. Gary Lee, Hopkins County Sheriff, in Both His Individual and Official Capacities, Hopkins County, Kentucky

284 F.3d 675 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 20, 2002

Defendant also argues that even if Plaintiffs state a valid claim, he is entitled to qualified immunity because the right of deputy sheriffs in Hopkins County to be protected from patronage dismissals was not clearly established … Defendant argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because when Plaintiffs were discharged, the law was not clearly established that deputy sheriffs in Hopkins County were protected from patronage dismissals.

Pense v. Md. Dep't of Pub. Safety & Corr. Servs.

926 F.3d 97 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 11, 2019

It is firmly established that we possess jurisdiction for this interlocutory review of the Immunity Decision pursuant to the collateral order doctrine. See P.R. Aqueduct & Sewer Auth. v. … By “draw[ing] upon principles of sovereign immunity,” the Supreme Court has “construe[d] the Amendment to establish that an unconsenting State is immune from suits brought in federal courts by her own citizens as well as

Hartsfield v. Lemacks

50 F.3d 950 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 14, 1995

A. 13 This court utilizes a two-part analysis for the defense of qualified immunity. … Alabama A & M University, 28 F.3d 1146, 1149 (11th Cir.1994) (en banc) (citations and footnotes omitted). 18 In Lassiter, we explained that for law to be clearly established in the qualified immunity context, "pre-existing

Michael Bearden v. Dudley Lemon, Individually and in His Official Capacity as the Sheriff of Cleburne County

475 F.3d 926 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 2, 2007

Further, “[t]his court has ... taken a broad view of what constitutes ‘clearly established law’ for the purposes of a qualified immunity inquiry....” Sexton 210 F.3d at 909 (quoting Boswell v. … “[I]f the law claimed to have been violated was clearly established, the qualified immunity defense ordinarily fails, ‘since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct.’ ” Id. at 910

Tachias v. Sanders

130 F.4th 836 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 10, 2025

Qualified Immunity’s “Clearly Established” Prong Accepting the district court’s unchallenged conclusion that Sanders’s actions constituted a violation of the Appellees’ First Amendment rights (see ROA at 33), we … now turn to the “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity.

Bell Atlantic Maryland, Inc. v. MCI Worldcom, Inc.

240 F.3d 279 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 14, 2001

These parties argued that the Maryland Public Service Commission had constructively waived its sovereign immunity with respect to this action by participating in the regulatory scheme established by the 1996 Act. … Section 252(e)(5) clearly implies that a State commission need not make determinations under § 252.

Jerry Capps v. David Olson

780 F.3d 879 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 16, 2015

(2) Clearly Established Constitutional Right Even if the jury could conclude a constitutional violation occurred, qualified immunity still protects an officer if the right defined in the specific context … of the case was not clearly established.

Snyder v. Daugherty

899 F. Supp. 2d 391 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 28, 2012

“An officer conducting a search is entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment. … To this end, the Defendant Officers seek qualified immunity on the grounds that their actions were reasonable 'in light of clearly established federal law.

Harris v. City of Cleveland

7 F. App'x 452 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 26, 2001

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, a law enforcement official performing a discretionary function may be immune from civil liability in a Bivens action if his conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … In particular, a plaintiff must establish with particularity that a defendant himself has violated some clearly established statutory or constitutional right in order to strip that person of the protection of qualified immunity

Charles Daniel Lindsey v. City of Orrick, Missouri, Shirley Taylor

491 F.3d 892 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 26, 2007

“Generally, government officials are entitled to qualified immunity under section 1983 when executing discretionary functions, unless the officials violate clearly established law.” Beck, 377 F.3d at 889 . … This court has “taken a broad view of what constitutes ‘clearly established law’ for the purposes of a qualified immunity inquiry.” Sexton, 210 F.3d at 909 (quoting Boswell v.

Roque v. Harvel

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 2, 2021

were clearly established at the time of the violation “such that the officer was on notice of the unlawfulness of his or her conduct.”6 The unique nature and purpose of qualified immunity affects both our jurisdiction … immunity unless his “actions were objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law at the time of the” shooting.31 The critical question when ascertaining the clearly established law is “whether the state of

Gary v. Crouch

867 So. 2d 310 · Supreme Court of Alabama · May 30, 2003

As police chief, Chief Crouch qualifies as a peace officer. However, Lt. … "'[S]ince the privilege under consideration is merely a qualified one, it is subject to the general rules . . . limiting qualified privileged communications; and there is no privilege where the communication is actuated by

Lyttle v. United States

867 F. Supp. 2d 1256 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Mar 31, 2012

Because their alleged conduct violated clearly established law, the Court rejects their qualified immunity defenses. … Battiste, 261 Fed.Appx. at 202-03 (stating that qualified immunity for failure to train is abrogated only where the officer has fair warning of clearly established law). d.

Ashcroft v. al-Kidd

563 U.S. 731 · Supreme Court of the United States · May 31, 2011

II Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was “clearly … Because Ashcroft did not violate clearly established law, we need not address the more difficult question whether he enjoys absolute immunity.