Case law

Smith v. Reddy

101 F.3d 351 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Nov 27, 1996

Law enforcement officers are entitled to qualified immunity from § 1983 liability arising from their official discretionary acts that do not "violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … If the right was not clearly established at the relevant time or if a reasonable officer might not have known his or her conduct violated that right, the officer is entitled to immunity.

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

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

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.

Jorge Rivera-Guadalupe v. City of Harrisburg

124 F.4th 295 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 24, 2024

We deny officers qualified immunity for violating clearly established constitutional rights—not for their failure to read tea leaves. This past year, the Supreme Court held in Chiaverini v. … Because the right that Rivera-Guadalupe seeks to vindicate in his malicious prosecution suit was not clearly established at the relevant time, the District Court erred in denying Det. Pierce qualified immunity.

Ajaj v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

25 F.4th 805 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 9, 2022

The defense of qualified immunity is a judicially recognized doctrine that shields government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Thus, the same context that supported a RFRA damages remedy also supported the application of qualified-immunity doctrine, which limits individual liability to violations of clearly established law.

Jerica Moore-Jones v. Anthony Quick

909 F.3d 983 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 28, 2018

Quick is entitled to qualified immunity unless his “conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable officer would have known.” Cravener v. … The district court erred in concluding Moore-Jones’s right was clearly established. Quick is entitled to qualified immunity. This also resolves Moore-Jones’s state-law, excessive-force claims. See Baldridge v.

Gordon v. Maesaka-Hirata.

431 P.3d 708 · Hawaii Supreme Court · Nov 2, 2018

As the circuit court initially correctly noted, the “clearly established right” portion of the two-part qualified immunity standard employs a reasonableness test. … In evaluating an official’s claim of qualified immunity, however, courts should not “define clearly established law at a high level of generality.” al-Kidd, 563 U.S. at 742.

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

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.

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.

Marsha Ann Mettler, Individually and as Trustee for the Heirs of Shawn Michael Mettler v. Edward M. Whitledge, Thomas Haltiner, Ramsey County, Marsha Ann Mettler, Individually and as Trustee for the Heirs of Shawn Michael Mettler v. Edward M. Whitledge, Thomas Haltiner, Ramsey County

165 F.3d 1197 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 25, 1999

Mettler's excessive force claim, because qualified immunity protects them from liability. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818-19 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) (saying that government officials have qualified immunity from civil liability under § 1983 "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Burrell v. Board of Trustees

970 F.2d 785 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 2, 1992

facts, if true, constitute a violation of clearly established law by the defendant[s].” … In part II B., we established that public officials cannot assert qualified immunity against a section 1985(3) claim.

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.

Colon v. Drew

335 F. App'x 86 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 5, 2009

immunity. … The right to be free from deliberate indifference to serious medical injury caused by excessive exposure to ETS is clearly established.

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.

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.

Cyeef-Din v. Onken

District Court, D. New Mexico · Dec 6, 2021

Whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity turns on whether his conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable official would have been aware. … Rickard, 572 U.S. 765, 778 (2014) (reaffirming that officials acting in discretionary capacities are generally entitled to qualified immunity unless their conduct violates clearly established law).

Herrera v. The Village of Angel Fire

District Court, D. New Mexico · Nov 5, 2021

Whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity turns on whether his conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable official would have been aware. … Rickard, 572 U.S. 765, 778 (2014) (reaffirming that officials acting in discretionary capacities are generally entitled to qualified immunity unless their conduct violates clearly established 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