Case law

Qasem v. Toro

737 F. Supp. 2d 147 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 10, 2010

Qualified Immunity Third, Thornton and Rogers claim that qualified immunity requires dismissal of this litigation as to them. … “A right is clearly established if (1) the law is defined with Supreme Court or the Second Circuit has recognized the right, and (3) ‘a reasonable defendant [would] have understood from the existing law that [his] conduct

Technical Ordnance, Inc. v. United States

244 F.3d 641 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 26, 2001

To defeat a government official's claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the official's actions violated a statutory or constitutional right, that the right was clearly established at the time of the … established constitutional right and that as a matter of law he is entitled to qualified immunity.

Alan McSurely v. John L. McClellan Thomas Ratliff, Individually and as Sometime Commonwealth Attorney for Pike County, Kentucky

697 F.2d 309 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 10, 1982

Qualified Immunity Ratliff’s investigative and administrative activities are entitled to qualified immunity from suit. As we noted earlier, Harlow makes the test for qualified immunity an objective one. … If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct.

April Sabbe v. Washington Cnty Bd of Comm'rs

84 F.4th 807 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 17, 2023

“Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” White v. … I would hold that Defendants’ entry onto Sabbe’s property was a clearly established violation of the Fourth Amendment, as to which Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Francisco Entila Et Al., Appellants, v. Gerald Cook Et Al., Respondents

190 Wash. App. 477 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 5, 2015

Given the legislative policy favoring third-party actions, one would expect any expansion of immunity to be clearly stated. Entila relies on Olson v. … To establish immunity, Cook must show that he was doing work for Boeing at the time of the accident.

Luchanski v. Officer J.L. Congrove

193 Ariz. 176 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Dec 22, 1998

We reverse in part because, even though appellees are afforded qualified immunity here, the allegations of the complaint are sufficient to allow appellants the opportunity to develop supporting evidence. … The statutory language provides that qualified immunity is available, "unless a public employee ... intended to cause injury or was grossly negligent.”

District Council 20, American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees v. District of Columbia

150 F. Supp. 2d 136 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 10, 2001

For purposes of qualified immunity, a right is “clearly established” if “the contours of that right [are] sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.” … immunity as to these claims which have not been clearly established in this or any other circuit.

Good v. Dauphin County Social Services for Children & Youth

891 F.2d 1087 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 15, 1989

a violation of a clearly established legal right. … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.

Spencer v. Roche

755 F. Supp. 2d 250 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 8, 2010

Qualified Immunity Defendant VHS contends that its nurse employees are entitled to qualified immunity for their actions, and that it cannot be liable under a theory of vicarious or supervisory liability for actions that are … Defendants Roche and Morris do not assert qualified immunity as a defense on summary judgment. 13 .

Tuttle v. Gallegos

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 29, 2026

A The qualified-immunity doctrine shields public officials from suit for damages under § 1983 unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right. Mace v. … of clearly established law.”

Gonzalez v. Otero

172 F. Supp. 3d 477 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Mar 28, 2016

Moss, — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 2056, 2061 , 188 L.Ed.2d 1039 (2014), the Court held that “[ó]ffícials are sheltered from suit, under a doctrine known as qualified immunity, when their conduct ‘does not violate clearly. established … the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.’

Thomas v. White Ex Rel. White

102 S.W.3d 318 · Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) · Mar 20, 2003

That may be accomplished, as it was noted in Kilburn and in Brazos, through the state’s derivative assertion of the employee’s qualified or official immunity. Id. … -Houston [14th Dist.] 1995, no writ)(City could appeal where individual employee raised government immunity and qualified immunity).

Daryl L. Davis v. Barbara Knell

375 F.3d 703 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 14, 2004

“in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time [the actions were] taken.” … Clearly Established The second question that we must ask in our qualified immunity analysis is whether the constitutional right alleged to have been violated was clearly established. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201.

Jones v. District of Columbia

892 F. Supp. 2d 108 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 21, 2012

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity is a defense that shields officials from suit if their conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.”

Ben Collins v. John Nagle

892 F.2d 489 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 22, 1989

Likewise, we find that the totality of facts and circumstances provided Nagle, Martin, Riddle and Brown with sufficient collective knowledge to establish probable cause to believe that M. … Dismissal was proper because it is established beyond a doubt that the appellants cannot prove any set of facts consistent with the allegations that would entitle them to relief. Conley v.

ESTATE OF SCOTT BY SCOTT v. DeLeon

603 F. Supp. 1328 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 13, 1985

I now consider the supervisory defendants' argument that they are protected against this claim by their qualified immunity, see Harlow v. … Accordingly, defendants' motion for summary judgment based on their qualified immunity is DENIED.

Hammel v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation

955 F. Supp. 2d 1205 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 28, 2013

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 person … Day would be entitled to qualified immunity if the proper standard were deliberate indifference. b) Clearly Established To avoid qualified immunity at step two, plaintiffs must show that the asserted right was clearly established

Rodríguez-Borton v. Pereira-Castillo

593 F. Supp. 2d 399 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Jan 16, 2009

For supervisors seeking qualified immunity, the clearly established prong is satisfied when “(1) the subordinate’s actions violated a clearly established constitutional right, and (2) it was clearly established that a supervisor … Both elements of the “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity test for supervisors are met here.

LANGE v. HOUSTON COUNTY, GEORGIA

District Court, M.D. Georgia · Oct 30, 2020

did not violate any clearly established rights. … “Qualified immunity offers complete protection for individual public officials performing discretionary functions ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 627, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 982 Brenda Lynne Carnell v. Cheryl Grimm, Chris Sueo, Yamaguchi, Susan Dowsett, Jerry Yoshit Kujiuji, Officer R. Noguchi, Officer P. Thorton, Officer C.K. Flynn, City and County of Honolulu, Officer Earl Penaroza, and John Does 1-10

74 F.3d 977 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 30, 1996

When a law enforcement officer asserts qualified immunity from liability, "the district court must determine whether, in light of clearly established principles governing the conduct in question, the officer objectively could … V. 12 The second step of analysis for a qualified immunity determination is whether under the clearly established law a reasonable officer could have believed that his conduct was lawful. Act Up!