Opinion ID: 6350790
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Qualified Immunity at the Pleadings Stage

Text: The Supreme Court has repeatedly . . . stressed the importance of resolving immunity questions at the earliest possible stage in litigation.” Hunter v. Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 227 (1991). But there is an obvious, if rarely expressed, 26 19-3575 Sabir v. Williams corollary to that principle: The immunity question cannot be resolved before the earliest possible stage, i.e., prior to ascertainment of the truth of the plausible factual allegations on which a finding of qualified immunity is premised. Chamberlain, 960 F.3d at 110 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The wardens chose to press their qualified immunity defense at the pleadings stage, and they therefore must face the more stringent standard applicable to this procedural route. McKenna v. Wright, 386 F.3d 432, 436 (2d Cir. 2004). Not only must the facts supporting the defense appear on the face of the complaint [or the evidence in its attachments], but . . . the motion may be granted only where it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief. Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). On a motion to dismiss, the plaintiffs are entitled to all reasonable inferences from the facts alleged, not only those that support [their] claim, but also those that defeat the immunity defense. Id. For this reason, we have explained that advancing qualified immunity as grounds for a motion to dismiss is almost always a procedural mismatch. Chamberlain, 960 F.3d at 111. Although it is possible for a qualified immunity defense to succeed on a motion to dismiss, see Liberian Cmty. Ass'n of 27 19-3575 Sabir v. Williams Connecticut v. Lamont, 970 F.3d 174, 186 (2d Cir. 2020), such a defense faces a formidable hurdle . . . and is usually not successful,” Field Day, LLC v. County of Suffolk, 463 F.3d 167, 191-92 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Chamberlain, 960 F.3d at 110 ([A]s a general rule, the defense of qualified immunity cannot support the grant of a [Rule] 12(b)(6) motion. (internal quotation marks omitted)).