Case law

Nicholas v. Attorney General

584 Utah Adv. Rep. 13 · Utah Supreme Court · Aug 14, 2007

Because the provision is not clearly directed at remedying past gender discrimination, Hibbs does not apply. … Because neither the death of a daughter-in-law nor the assistance of a healthy adult child qualifies for family-care leave, Ms. Nicholas could only qualify for leave under the self-care provision of the FMLA. .

Whitaker v. Pima County

640 F. Supp. 2d 1095 · District Court, D. Arizona · Feb 17, 2009

Petropoulos is entitled to qualified immunity. Analysis of Qualified Immunity as to Maldonado Plaintiff does not dispute that Whitaker accelerated through the lot and hit Maldonado’s vehicle. … Maldonado is entitled to qualified immunity.

Sweaney v. Ada County

119 F.3d 1385 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 15, 1997

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … We held that the social workers’ conduct was shielded by qualified immunity. Id. at 334 .

Laura Ann Juriss v. Paul McGowan and Russell Stanfield, Jointly and Severally

957 F.2d 345 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 24, 1992

In evaluating this argument, we examine whether the right McGowan allegedly violated was “clearly established in a particularized sense.” Cleveland-Perdue v. … We therefore reject his first argument for qualified immunity.

Krug v. Lutz

329 F.3d 692 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 14, 2003

Qualified Immunity 16 Krug, for his part, challenges the district court's conclusion that the ADOC officials are entitled to qualified immunity from his claim for damages. … We therefore move on: 17 [T]he next, sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established.

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.

Charles H. Wilson Geraldine E. Wilson Raquel Wilson, Next Friend/mother of Valencia Snowden, a Minor v. Harry Layne, Deputy, United States Marshal, Supervisor for the Washington Area, Operation Gunsmoke Joseph L. Perkins James A. Olivo, and Raymond M. Kight, Sheriff, Montgomery County, Maryland John Doe, Unknown Sheriff's Deputies John Doe, Unknown U.S. Marshals United States of America Eric E. Runion Mark A. Collins Brian E. Roynestad, Charles H. Wilson Geraldine E. Wilson Raquel Wilson, Next Friend/mother of Valencia Snowden, a Minor v. Mark A. Collins Eric E. Runion Brian E. Roynestad, and Raymond M. Kight, Sheriff, Montgomery County, Maryland John Doe, Unknown Sheriff's Deputies Harry Layne, Deputy, United States Marshal, Supervisor for the Washington Area, Operation Gunsmoke John Doe, Unknown U.S. Marshals United States of America Joseph L. Perkins James A. Olivo

141 F.3d 111 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 8, 1998

Furthermore, the district court refused to accept the officers' alternative argument that, at a minimum, they were entitled to qualified immunity because in April 1992, the law was not clearly established that permitting … Talladega City Bd. of Educ., 115 F.3d 821 , 826 n. 4 (11th Cir.1997) (en banc) (explaining that "the law can be 'clearly established' for qualified immunity purposes only by decisions of the U.S.

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.

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.

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.]

Johnson v. Wright

423 F. Supp. 2d 1242 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Oct 17, 2005

Case law need not arise out of factually identical situations to clearly establish law for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis. Id. at 1351 . … Indeed, the Eleventh Circuit has repeatedly held that this legal tenant is “clearly established” for purposes of addressing qualified immunity claims by public officials. See, e.g., Id.; Herren v.

Victor Santiago v. Daniel Blair

707 F.3d 984 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Feb 27, 2013

was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct. … “Under the rule established in Pearson, we have the discretion to decide ‘which of the two prongs of the qualified immunity analysis should be addressed first in light of the circumstances in the particular case at hand.’

Hartwell v. City of Montgomery, AL

487 F. Supp. 2d 1313 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · May 10, 2007

Under the qualified-immunity rule, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … to qualified immunity.

Garretson v. City of Madison Heights

407 F.3d 789 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 27, 2005

entitled to qualified immunity. … legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.”

Fernando Saint-Jean v. Palisades Interstate Park

49 F.4th 830 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 23, 2022

demonstrated a violation of a constitutional right – an arrest and prosecution without probable cause – that applied with obvious clarity to Saint-Jean’s particular circumstances, such that the constitutional violation was clearly-established … of qualified immunity at the motion-to-dismiss stage.

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-

Gilchinsky v. NATIONAL WESTMINISTER BANK

159 N.J. 463 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 14, 1999

N.J.S.A. 25:2-1 provides a “qualified immunity” for funds deposited in a New Jersey IRA. The purpose behind such expansive protection is to prevent creditors from attaching money earmarked for retirement. … In exempting fraudulent conveyances from the otherwise broad-based immunity, the Legislature clearly intended to prevent debtors from using New. Jersey law to shield their assets from creditors.

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.