Case law

Brown v. Gilmore

278 F.3d 362 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 23, 2002

Next, assuming that the violation of the right is established, courts must consider whether the right was clearly established at the time such that it would be clear to an objectively reasonable officer that his conduct violated … Because, "[i]f no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquires concerning qualified immunity."

Nebraska Beef, Ltd. v. Greening

398 F.3d 1080 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 28, 2005

The Supreme Court instructed that: 6 A necessary concomitant to the determination of whether the constitutional right asserted by a plaintiff is `clearly established' at the time the defendant acted is the determination of … We stated in Buchholz, citing Drake, that "[i]f defendants prevail on [establishing that Buchholz has no cause of action], `it follows a fortiori' they are entitled to qualified immunity." Id. at 865.

People v. Trinity Holistic Caregivers, Inc.

239 Cal. App. Supp. 4th 9 · Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California · Aug 20, 2015

Nothing in the definition requires the other MMB within LAMC section 45.19.6.3’s 600-foot radius to be one which qualifies for immunity. … “permanently” disqualify the otherwise qualified MMB from obtaining immunity.

Timothy Daryl Atkins v. John Gibson Lanning, Kenneth D. Fouts and Randall Craig Ruark

556 F.2d 485 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jun 8, 1977

Hence the arresting officer is entitled to the qualified immunity defense of a good faith belief that his behavior was proper. See Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232 , 94 S.Ct. 1683 , 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974); Pierson v. … But the alternative of qualifying a prosecutor’s immunity would disserve the broader public interest.

Joseph W. Democko, Donald Jones and James Samis v. Iowa Department of Natural Resources

840 N.W.2d 281 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Dec 6, 2013

Iowa Code chapter 483A establishes a framework for the issuance of hunting and fishing licenses in Iowa. … In Hoeven, the Eighth Circuit implied certain property rights established under state law may be fundamental.

Klay v. Panetta

924 F. Supp. 2d 8 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 7, 2013

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of 5 … at 34, and that is the teaching of Iqbal. 556 U.S. at 677 (stating that to determine “whether there is a violation of clearly established right to overcome qualified immunity, purpose rather than knowledge is required”)

Eric Andre v. Clayton County, Georgia

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 15, 2025

alleged a Fourth Amendment violation, the individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because, in relevant part, the law was not clearly established. … A supervisor is entitled to qualified immunity if his alleged supervisory conduct did not violate clearly established law. See Ingram, 30 F.4th at 1256; see also Alcocer v.

Cunningham v. Gates

989 F. Supp. 1256 · District Court, C.D. California · Dec 15, 1997

IMMUNITY STANDARD “Government officials who perform discretionary functions are protected from liability for civil damages as long as ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … The threshold determination of whether the law is clearly established is a question of law for the court. [Citations.]

Middaugh v. City of Three Rivers

629 F. App'x 710 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 26, 2015

It is well established, however, that the doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Clearly Established Rights The second step of our qualified immunity analysis asks whether the rights at issue were clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. See id. at 306 .

Antonio Smith v. John Kind

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 30, 2025

But the Supreme Court has cautioned courts against reason- ing from broad principles when considering whether a right is clearly established for qualified immunity purposes. See Kisela, 584 U.S. at 104. … Sheriff of Cook County, 993 F.3d 981, 988 (7th Cir. 2021) (“The prong-two clearly-established-law assess- ment does not require a case with identical factual circum- stances, lest qualified immunity become absolute immun-

Webb v. Greene County Sheriff's Office

494 F. Supp. 2d 779 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 6, 2007

Even where an officer has violated a plaintiffs constitutional rights, that officer is entitled to qualified immunity if the right that he violated was not “clearly established” at the time of the violation. … As the right that Keller is accused of violating was clearly established at the time of the *795 arrest, he is not entitled to qualified immunity. 4.

Davis v. Education Service Center

62 S.W.3d 890 · Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana) · Dec 5, 2001

. § 22.051(a); rather, Region VIII qualifies for sovereign immunity as an agency of the State. Sovereign immunity, unless waived, insulates the State of Texas, its agencies, and its officials from lawsuits for damages. … In Matthews , the court ruled the defendant did not have a qualified immunity for violating Title VII. Id. at 847 .

Rivera-Sanchez v. Autoridad De Energia Electrica

360 F. Supp. 2d 302 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Mar 1, 2005

Co-defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … As such, the individual co-defendants contend they are entitled to qualified immunity. (Docket No. 44, pp. 3-4). Plaintiff has failed to rebut the qualified immunity raised by the individual co-defendants.

Sledd v. Lindsay

864 F. Supp. 819 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 30, 1994

It is a well settled tenet that under the judicially created doctrine of qualified immunity, public officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from civil damages unless their conduct violates a clearly established … “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials ... from damages unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” Elder v.

Scott Hanson v. William Shubert

968 F.3d 1014 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 4, 2020

SHUBERT 5 in part found that Shubert and Gonzalez could not be accorded qualified immunity as a matter of law, as genuine factual disputes remained as to whether they violated Hanson’s clearly … established rights.

Doe Ex Rel. Pahssen v. Merrill Community School District

610 F. Supp. 2d 789 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 26, 2009

Second, Defendants have clearly raised the defense of qualified immunity with respect to Plaintiffs due process claim. … Qualified immunity provides that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or

Baltas v. Erfe

District Court, D. Connecticut · Sep 15, 2022

"The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … If no such right is clearly established, then the defendants are protected by qualified immunity.

Linda Mays v. H.G. Rhodes

255 F.3d 644 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 29, 2001

Qualified immunity generally shields public officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability if "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Second, the right allegedly violated must be clearly established. Id.

Jag v. City of Warren

944 F. Supp. 606 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Nov 5, 1996

clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Therefore, when a defendant moves for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, as is the case here, the plaintiff must: 1) identify a clearly established right alleged to have been violated; and 2) establish that a reasonable

Antonio Smith v. John Kind

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 10, 2025

But the Supreme Court has cautioned courts against reason- ing from broad principles when considering whether a right is clearly established for qualified immunity purposes. See Kisela, 584 U.S. at 104. … Sheriff of Cook County, 993 F.3d 981, 988 (7th Cir. 2021) (“The prong-two clearly-established-law assess- ment does not require a case with identical factual circum- stances, lest qualified immunity become absolute immun-