New 11th Circuit decision affirming denial of QI to school officials who allegedly interfered for racially discriminatory reasons with a settlement agreement (a contract) the district entered into with an employee. Notable:
• The opinion does a nice job synthesizing and stating the rule/explanation for QI.
• FN 3 explains why this is a § 1983 action to enforce rights under § 1981.
• The court treats this as an obviousness case.
• The court focuses QI on the wrongfulness of the defendants' conduct (and whether that wrongfulness was clearly established), not on the rules of individual liability (and whether they were clearly established). That is, it is enough that it was clearly established that people cannot interfere with contracts for racially discriminatory reasons; that their individual liability might not have been does not matter.
