Case law

Hopkins Ex Rel. Hopkins v. Spring Independent School District

706 S.W.2d 325 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 30, 1986

In the third and fourth points, Appellants allege the trial court erred in granting summary judgment for the school principal, the school nurse and the teacher based on qualified immunity under the Tex *328 as Education Code … Clearly, the Texas Supreme Court intends that the waiver of governmental immunity is a matter to be addressed by the legislature. Barr, 562 S.W.2d at 846 ; Lowe v. Texas Tech University, 540 S.W.2d 297, 298 (Tex.1976).

Progress Michigan v. Attorney General

324 Mich. App. 659 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 19, 2018

] -4-  It is a clearly established principle that “when the Legislature specifically qualifies the ability to bring a claim against the state or its subdivisions … Even “ ‘post-Court of Claims Act’ legislation waiving suit immunity . . . is limited by the terms and conditions of jurisdiction established in the Court of Claims Act.”

Phillips v. Gray

163 N.C. App. 52 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 17, 2004

The Fund clearly defines county sheriffs and chief deputies as “Law Enforcement Employees.” … To establish a cause of action for wrongful discharge in violation of free speech, plaintiff must forecast sufficient evidence “that the speech complained of qualified as protected speech or activity” and “that such protected

Wuertz v. Wilson

922 S.W.2d 268 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jun 12, 1996

In point of error one, Wuertz argues that the trial court erred in denying him qualified immunity by overruling his motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and motion for new trial because the evidence conclusively … Thus, in this ease, we must consider only the evidence and inferences tending to support the finding that Wuertz was not entitled to the qualified immunity privilege and disregard all evidence and inferences to the contrary

Davis v. City of Palestine

973 S.W.2d 319 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Aug 27, 1997

’ claims; 5) Davis complains of an Act of God; 6) qualified immunity of City, officials preserve the City’s sovereign immunity; 7) the statute of limitations and statutory notice provisions bar Davis’ claims; and 8) any inverse … Because the City failed to establish its affirmative defense of sovereign immunity as a matter of law, we sustain points of error three and five.

Schuller v. Swan

911 S.W.2d 396 · Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Dec 21, 1995

Immunity.” … Chambers, 883 S.W.2d 650 (Tex.1994), claiming that the so called “new” good faith test of an actor, that relates to state immunity law is an objective one and that the court has clearly adopted the federal “objective good

State Ex Rel. Gelesh v. State Medical Board

172 Ohio App. 3d 365 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 2007

On the other hand, the board contends that it, not the trial court, must determine the facts necessary to establish Dr. Gelesh’s entitlement to immunity. … Although it does not offer any specific argument regarding ambiguity in the term “professional disciplinary action,” the board clearly advocates that R.C. 2133.11 immunity does not extend to disciplinary adjudications by

Phillip K. Poteet, Individually and as Next Friend for Jeffrey Poteet, a Minor v. Collin J. Sullivan, Henry Lucio, Byron Lake and Town of Flower Mound, Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) · Feb 1, 2007

For the defense of qualified immunity under federal law and section 1983 claims, however, such is not the case: A [A] defendant asserting immunity is not required to establish the defense beyond peradventure, as he would … Qualified Immunity Government officials performing discretionary functions are protected from civil liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity if their conduct violates no clearly established statutory or constitutional

Matarazzo v. Millers Mutual Group, Inc.

927 A.2d 689 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 2, 2007

Our court reversed, holding that the allegations and inferences were sufficient to state a cause of action based on promissory estop-pel. 4 Plaintiffs here assert that the holding in Travers establishes that the immunity … Preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer should be sustained only where the pleadings are clearly insufficient to establish a right to relief; any doubt must be resolved in favor of overruling the demurrer.

Tagliavia v. County of Los Angeles

112 Cal. App. 3d 759 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 28, 1980

preserve the system established for the administration of the law. … On that same ground it has been held that although a judge’s exercise of criminal contempt power is clearly judicial in nature and falls within the scope of judicial immunity, the eviction of a person from the courtroom by

Karsom v. State

155 Haw. 192 · Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 2024

This argument was raised in opposition to Lumabao's MSJ in conjunction with the Parents' argument that Lumabao was not entitled to qualified immunity. … Lumabao was a maintenance worker, not a government official.4 The Circuit Court clearly erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Lumabao on the basis of qualified immunity, the sole ground raised in Lumabao's

Human Rights v. Agency Education

Vermont Superior Court · Nov 20, 2024

The Court concluded in Winfield that the employees’ conduct was protected by qualified immunity. … ” component of the qualified immunity inquiry.

Quidachay v. Kansas Dept. of Corrections

51 Kan. App. 2d 278 · Court of Appeals of Kansas · Mar 13, 2015

Moreover, the district court declined to grant Heimgartner and Bratton qualified immunity. … discrimination, which includes the right to have reasonable accommodation, is clearly established."

Easterling v. Brogan

2012 Ohio 1852 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 27, 2012

The trial court in that action sustained Croswell’s motion for summary judgment, finding that the handbook clearly established that Easterling was an at-will employee, that the disciplinary procedures in the handbook created … Division (A)(6) grants political-subdivision employees qualified immunity: In addition to any immunity or defense referred to in division (A)(7) of this section * * *, the employee is immune from liability

Freier v. Independent School District No. 197

356 N.W.2d 724 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Oct 23, 1984

It is well established: One who is required by law to publish defamatory matter is absolutely privileged to publish it. Restatement (2d) of Torts Section 592A (1977); Johnson v. … Therefore, there is no justification for limiting board members’ exposure to a qualified immunity under Minnesota’s statutory scheme.

Joner v. Board of Education

91 Pa. Commw. 145 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 15, 1985

Regardless of whether' the Appellant has alleged facts which would have otherwise qualified her claim under an exception to governmental immunity, and we do not now decide whether she has done so, she has not alleged facts … Clearly Vann does not establish such a rule, but establishes only that, under the facts as pleaded in that case, the criminal acts were not a foreseeable use of school property as a matter of law. See Bersani v.

People v. Bylsma; People v. Overholt

315 Mich. App. 363 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 17, 2016

Most relevant to this appeal, the court concluded that defendant failed to establish that he was entitled to immunity under § 4, and because his entitlement to an affirmative defense under § 8 was dependent on whether he … In particular, § 4 “grants broad immunity from criminal prosecution and civil penalties” to registered “qualifying patient[s]” and “primary caregiver[s]” who can satisfy the elements of that section.

Texas Department of Public Safety v. Kenneth F. Sanders, Jr.

Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) · Apr 16, 2026

The Texas Legislature, by its enactment of the TCHRA, “clearly and unambiguously waives immunity” for governmental units like DPS, but the waiver applies “only for those suits where the plaintiff actually alleges a violation … to establish a prima facie retaliation case, it follows he has also failed to invoke the TCHRA’s limited waiver of sovereign immunity.

Canell v. State

185 Or. App. 174 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 27, 2002

high level of public authority; routine decisions that every employee must make, even when they require judgment, do not qualify for discretionary immunity). … Myers, 169 Or App 472, 478 , 10 P3d 265 (2000), rev den, 331 Or 692 (2001) (outlining what a plaintiff must demonstrate to establish negligence per se).

Peach County School District v. Donna M. Austin

Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jun 20, 2013

“Sovereign immunity is not an affirmative 2 defense that must be established by the party seeking its protection. … Moreover, qualified immunity is an entitlement not to stand trial, rather than a mere defense to liability, and “courts must consider the issue of a government employee’s qualified immunity from liability as the threshold