Case law

Plyler v. Burns

373 S.C. 637 · Supreme Court of South Carolina · Jun 11, 2007

The burden of establishing a limitation upon liability or an exception to the waiver of immunity under the Tort Claims Act is upon the governmental entity asserting it as an affirmative defense. … The unambiguous language of the statute clearly refers to the protection of the physical person. Plyler makes no claim that the probate court breached any duty to protect her from physical harm.

Sanchez v. State

143 Idaho 239 · Idaho Supreme Court · Aug 8, 2006

The district court also ruled pre-judgment interest was clearly authorized by I.C. § 67-5316(4). … This language does not qualify as a clear waiver of sovereign immunity; therefore, we do not find a basis for an award of prejudgment interest against IDOC. C.

Gabriel v. Bauman

847 N.W.2d 537 · South Dakota Supreme Court · May 21, 2014

In this case, Chester Fire established it was entitled to immunity as a public entity. … Chester Fire Department would qualify as a legal entity that Chester Rural Fire Protection District is “authorized by law to establish.”

Hardy v. Chester Arms, LLC

320 A.3d 6 · Supreme Court of New Hampshire · Jan 30, 2024

We accordingly conclude that RSA 508:21 provides complete immunity from qualified civil liability actions regardless of whether a third party is partly or solely responsible for a plaintiff’s harm. … In other words, if DOS can show that, even viewing the record in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, MacPherson was qualified under federal law, the plaintiffs would be unable to establish that the shooting occurred

People v. Chestnut

26 N.Y.2d 481 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 4, 1970

I). 3 Their testimony demonstrated that most of the persons on that list had qualified and served as grand jurors in previous years. … By choosing jurors on the basis of these factors, rather than race or ethnic background,, their actions were clearly consistent with the policies embodied in the Equal Protection Clause.

CHIMENTO v. GALLAGHER BENEFIT SERVICES

2023 OK 22 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 21, 2023

Section 363(B) provides qualified immunity from civil actions for individuals who furnish information to the OID regarding fraudulent insurance activity. … Additionally, Kirschstein did not involve an applicable statute, like § 363, establishing qualified immunity for statements made to the relevant administrative agency, nor were we bound in that case by a prior decision from

Tango v. Tulevech

61 N.Y.2d 34 · New York Court of Appeals · Dec 20, 1983

In an action brought under section 1983 of title 42 of the United States Code against a public official, such as defendant here, who is arguably entitled to a qualified immunity under Federal law, plaintiff must establish … Although plaintiff’s claim to custody of the children ultimately prevailed in the New York action, it was not clearly established on October 31,1977 and the cause of action was properly dismissed.

Pereira v. Commissioner of Social Services

432 Mass. 251 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Aug 9, 2000

immunity because the *253 constitutional right of free speech, he said, was “clearly established,” and a reasonable official “would have understood” that firing Pereira would viólate her constitutional rights. … To overcome a claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show that the State official directly participated in violating a right of the plaintiff that is “clearly established.” See Anderson v.

Retail Credit Co. v. Garraway

240 Miss. 230 · Mississippi Supreme Court · Jan 30, 1961

The record clearly establishes in this case that the reports made by appellant to the three insurance companies, its subscribers, come within this qualified privilege. … The effect of their testimony was to establish that the reports were made under qualifiedly privileged conditions.

Jan Paul Fruiterman, M.D. & Associates, P.C. v. Waziri

259 Va. 540 · Supreme Court of Virginia · Mar 3, 2000

That act “established the *543 Virginia Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Program.” § 38.2-5002(A). … Clearly, the General Assembly did not intend to immunize all health-care providers from tort liability for birth-related neurological injury caused by medical malpractice.

Parrish v. Dunn (In re Price)

256 So. 3d 1184 · Supreme Court of Alabama · Jan 12, 2018

Parrish argues that Price and Lovelace, like Wood, have failed to present evidence establishing that they qualify for one of the Cranman immunity categories. … Thus, we conclude that Loveless qualifies for immunity under Cranman categories one and two. Accordingly, Price and Lovelace met their burden of establishing that they fall under an immunity category in Cranman .

Bonington v. Town of Westport

297 Conn. 297 · Supreme Court of Connecticut · Jul 6, 2010

Under the common law, “[generally, a municipal employee is hable for the misperformance of ministerial acts, but has a qualified immunity in the performance of governmental acts. . . . … In order to overcome qualified immunity in such cases, the plaintiff must plead and prove that the official made the discretionary determination that triggered the ministerial duty. See Grignano v.

Town of Loxley v. Coleman

720 So. 2d 907 · Supreme Court of Alabama · Aug 7, 1998

An agent of the State is not protected by absolute immunity when a complaint alleges negligent or wanton conduct, but in such a case the agent may be entitled to qualified immunity. … Denham was not entitled to qualified immunity in her individual capacity; therefore, the trial court properly denied the summary judgment as to Coleman's claims against Denham.

Guerrero Ex Rel. Guerrero v. Alaska Housing Finance Corp.

6 P.3d 250 · Alaska Supreme Court · Aug 4, 2000

Second, our cases and case law in other jurisdictions do not clearly establish the seope of a landlord's duty in comparable settings. … Neither case is apposite: Aspen deals with qualified official immunity and J & L Diversified involves municipal immunity under AS 09.65.070 from suits arising out of the permitting process. 78 . 498 P.2d 712, 722 (Alaska

State v. Lombard

486 So. 2d 106 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Mar 31, 1986

Defendant contends that Mattheson's rejection of defense witness immunity was qualified, that under certain narrow circumstances a trial judge can grant immunity. … In any event, the judge's failure to give the requested charge was harmless because the evidence concerning the events surrounding the confrontation clearly established to the jury that defendant was not the aggressor and

A.W. Financial Services, S.A. v. Empire Resources, Inc.

981 A.2d 1114 · Supreme Court of Delaware · Sep 15, 2009

In Delaware, as in most states, however, qualified immunity generally shields the peace officer from liability. What is important analytically is that qualified immunity does not supersede the common law of tort. … Because those defendants are seeking immunity protection under that statute, they are the parties responsible for establishing that the good faith requirement has been met.

State v. Howland

125 N.H. 497 · Supreme Court of New Hampshire · Sep 27, 1984

the class established by RSA 169-C:29 (Supp. 1983). … An alleged perpetrator of child abuse cannot, as a matter of law, "suspect” that child abuse is occurring or has occurred for purposes of qualifying for the immunity conferred by RSA 169-C:31 (Supp. 1983).

Mellin v. Flood Brook Union School District

173 Vt. 202 · Supreme Court of Vermont · Dec 21, 2001

“Good faith exists where an official’s acts did not violate clearly established rights of which the official reasonably should have known.” Sabia v. Neville, 165 Vt. 515, 521 , 687 A.2d 469, 473 (1996). … immunity); see also Rich, 167 Vt. at 424 , 709 A.2d at 507 (disputed factual issue central to plaintiffs retaliation claim precluded summary judgment on qualified immunity).

Purdy v. Fleming

655 N.W.2d 424 · South Dakota Supreme Court · Dec 11, 2002

Additionally, the trial court granted summary judgment on the federal claim because of qualified immunity. [¶ 10.] … Whether Purdy’s federal claim under 42 USC § 1983 is barred by qualified immunity. [¶ 31.]

Dr. Behzad Nazari, D.D.S. v. State

561 S.W.3d 495 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 22, 2018

CODE § 32.0391 (establishing a criminal offense for kickback and bribery schemes). 21 See TEX. HUM. RES. … These allegations are clearly connected and relevant to the parties’ claims, and if the Providers are correct, their counterclaims will rebut the allegations on which the State’s claims are based. See State v.