How Qualified Immunity Works

"Here, as in other contexts, immunity is justified and defined by the functions it protects and serves, not by the person to whom it attaches.

This Court has never undertaken to articulate a precise and general definition of the class of acts entitled to immunity. The decided cases, however, suggest an intelligible distinction between judicial acts and the administrative, legislative, or executive functions that judges may on occasion be assigned by law to perform."

"Whether the act done by him was judicial or not is to be determined by its character, and not by the character of the agent. Whether he was a county judge or not is of no importance. The duty of selecting jurors might as well have been committed to a private person as to one holding the office of a judge. . . . That the jurors are selected for a court makes no difference. So are court-criers, tipstaves, sheriffs, &c. Is their election or their appointment a judicial act?"

1. whether the plaintiff's rights were violated; and
2. whether the violated right was clearly established at the time of the violation.

• see Harper v. Lawrence Cnty., Ala., 592 F.3d 1227, 1233 (11th Cir. 2010)

1. whether the official was performing a discretionary function; and
   • undertaken pursuant to the performance of his/her duties; and
   • within the scope of his/her authority
2. whether the violated right was clearly established at the time of the violation.

• see Madiwale v. Savaiko, 117 F.3d 1321, 1324 (11th Cir.1997)
• see Lenz v. Winburn, 51 F.3d 1540, 1545 (11th Cir.1995)

• specific statutory provisions;
• specific constitutional provisions;
• principles of law enunciated in relevant decisions;
• factually similar cases already decided by federal courts in the relevant jurisdiction;
• factually similar cases already decided by state courts in the relevant jurisdiction; and/or
• "obvious clarity" that the officer's conduct is so unreasonable that he "had to know he was violating the Constitution without case law on point."

• see Goebert v. Lee Cnty., 510 F.3d 1312, 1330 (11th Cir. 2007)
• see Jay v. Hendershott, 579 F. App'x 948, 950-51 (11th Cir. 2014)

"Qualified immunity is not available as a defense to a 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) claim. Johnson v. City of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., 126 F.3d 1372, 1379 (11th Cir. 1997)