Case law

Prisma Zona Exploratoria De Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Calderon

154 F. Supp. 2d 245 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Aug 14, 2001

Defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss based on Eleventh Amendment immunity and qualified immunity grounds. The motion to dismiss stands submitted. … Determination of whether a reasonable official should have understood that a specific conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right, or whether an entity is to be considered an “arm of the state”, are fact intensive

Hobart v. City of Stafford

784 F. Supp. 2d 732 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 29, 2011

Officials sued in their individual capacities are protected by qualified immunity unless the act violates a constitutional right clearly established at the time. Sanchez v. Swyden, 139 F.3d 464, 466-467 (5th Cir.1998). … To determine whether the plaintiff has overcome the presumption of qualified immunity, the Court first considers whether the plaintiff has proven a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Collins v.

Bailey v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 69 of Canadian Cnty. Okla.

896 F.3d 1176 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 24, 2018

Nonetheless, we affirm the district court's grant of qualified immunity to school superintendent Sean McDaniel because the law was not previously clearly established on this issue. … We AFFIRM the district court's conclusion that McDaniel is entitled to qualified immunity, on the alternative ground that the law at issue was not clearly established at the time he violated it.

Weldeyohannes v. State of Washington

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 19, 2025

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages unless their conduct objectively violates clearly established rights. Harlow v. … impact whether the “unlawfulness . . . was clearly established at the time,” we reverse and remand the determinations of qualified immunity. 6 Id.

Heyne v. METROPOLITAN NASHVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS

686 F. Supp. 2d 724 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Nov 3, 2009

Defendants argue that they did not violate any clearly established constitutional rights of Christian Heyne, that the individual Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, and that Defendant Metro cannot be liable because … Qualified Immunity 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

Bryson v. Gonzales

534 F.3d 1282 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Jul 28, 2008

defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. … The only issues that properly belong in an interlocutory appeal for qualified immunity are the existence of a constitutional violation and whether it was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s conduct.

Mann v. Palmerton Area School District

189 F. Supp. 3d 467 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 2, 2016

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that even if Plaintiffs can establish their state-created danger claim, Coach Walkowiak is entitled to qualified immunity. … In analyzing whether the coach was entitled to qualified immunity, the Third Circuit explained that although district court opinions “may be relevant to the determination of when a right was clearly established for qualified

Parks v. City of Brewer

56 F. Supp. 2d 89 · District Court, D. Maine · Jul 16, 1999

Qualified Immunity To assess a claim of qualified immunity, a court must determine (i) whether the plaintiff has alleged the violation of a clearly established right, and (ii) whether a reasonable, similarly situated defendant … When the existence of a constitutional right rests solely on the outcome of a balancing test, many courts have determined that the right generally is not clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity.

Ex parte Ingram

229 So. 3d 220 · Supreme Court of Alabama · Feb 24, 2017

The same result is reached in federal qualified-immunity analysis by the requirement that the right the defendant is alleged to have violated must be “clearly established,” by which the federal cases mean not only that the … Saucier further instructs that ‘[i]f the law did not put the officer on notice that his conduct would be clearly unlawful, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is appropriate.’ Id. (emphasis added).”

Ex Parte Turner

840 So. 2d 132 · Supreme Court of Alabama · Jun 21, 2002

and qualified immunity. … Turner's affidavit provides uncontroverted sworn statements that sufficiently establish qualified immunity from the § 1983 action.

Habiger v. City of Fargo

905 F. Supp. 709 · District Court, D. North Dakota · Jan 23, 1995

“Qualified immunity protects a government official *717 from suit if, at the time of the challenged acts, it was not clearly established that those actions would violate clearly established law of which a reasonable person … For purposes of qualified immunity, a right is clearly established if a reasonable official would understand that his or her conduct violates that particular right because the contours of the right are sufficiently clear.

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.

Wilber v. Curtis

872 F.3d 15 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Sep 20, 2017

Gikas, 861 F.3d 296, 302 (1st Cir. 2017), but also "whether the right was 'clearly established' at the time of" the challenged governmental conduct, id. at 303. … And, a government official, in consequence of qualified immunity, may not be held liable under § 1983 unless the official is found to have violated a federal law right that is clearly established. Id.

Van Deelen v. Shawnee Mission Unified School District 512

316 F. Supp. 2d 1052 · District Court, D. Kansas · Feb 18, 2004

Qualified Immunity Under certain circumstances, the affirmative defense of qualified immunity shields public officials from individual liability in actions brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Harlow v. … At the very least, the law was not clearly established that plaintiffs conduct was constitutionally protected, thus entitling defendants Krawitz and Burgat to qualified immunity on this basis as well.

William Hurt v. Matthew Wise

880 F.3d 831 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 23, 2018

of  clearly  established  law.  … Even if, in hindsight, it appears that probable cause  was lacking, qualified immunity is still available if the arrest‐ ing officers “reasonabl[y] … could have believed the arrest to  be  lawful,  in  light  of  clearly 

Losch v. Borough of Parkesburg

736 F.2d 903 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 14, 1984

Qualified immunity protects a defendant who failed to observe a right or a legal standard that was not clearly established when the defendant acted. Thus, the Court held in Procunier v. … On the other hand, as the Harlow Court concluded, “[i]f the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail,” unless the defendant “claims extraordinary circumstances and can prove that he neither

Wilson v. City Of Des Moines

293 F.3d 447 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 7, 2002

If the court determines that a constitutional right was violated, then the Court stated that the next question that should be considered is "whether the right was clearly established." Id. 9 Graham v. … The Court analyzed the applicability of qualified immunity by using the two-part inquiry established in Saucier.

Brian Grady v. El Paso Community College, Linda Luehrs

979 F.2d 1111 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 30, 1992

An official is entitled to qualified immunity unless her conduct violated clearly established federal rights. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). … The First Amendment protections of state employees who speak on matters of public concern are clearly established. See e.g. Mt. Healthy City School Dist. Bd. of Educ. v.

State v. Copple

224 Neb. 672 · Nebraska Supreme Court · Feb 13, 1987

A statute is presumed to be constitutional and unconstitutionality must be clearly established before this court is authorized to declare it void. State v. Neal, 187 Neb. 413, 416 , 191 N.W.2d 458, 460 (1971). … A trial court’s finding that a prima facie case has been established concerning existence of a conspiracy will be upheld unless such finding is clearly erroneous. Cf. United States v.

Pabon v. Wright

459 F.3d 241 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 3, 2006

Because this right was not clearly established in this circuit when Pabon was diagnosed with and treated for Hepatitis C, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to all Defendants on qualified-immunity grounds … According to this second inquiry, a qualified-immunity defense will be successful either when the defendants’ actions did not violate clearly established law or when it was objectively reasonable for the defendants to believe