Case law

Perez v. Metropolitan District Commisssion

186 Conn. App. 466 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Dec 11, 2018

on the ground of governmental immunity. … [W]hether a partic- ular plaintiff comes within a cognizable class of foresee- able victims for purposes of this narrowly drawn exception to qualified immunity ultimately is a question of law for the courts, in that it is

Fishermen Against Irresponsible Reallocation, Inc. v. Fish & Wildlife Commission

222 Or. App. 353 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 24, 2008

for antitrust immunity, that premise is wrong. … Other governmental actors may establish *361 state policy for purposes of antitrust immunity through the rulemaking process. See, e.g., Bates v.

Fuhrmann v. Hattaway

109 Mich. App. 429 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 10, 1981

The standard for review of summary judgments based on GCR 1963, 117.2(1), is well established. … As such, they are cloaked with governmental immunity.

Alford v. Osei-Kwasi

203 Ga. App. 716 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Mar 18, 1992

They also asserted they were entitled to judgment on any constitutional claims because of qualified immunity and on the state tort claims because of official immunity. … immunity because he acted in good faith and the law clearly did not prohibit his actions.

Hallmark v. City of Fredericksburg

94 S.W.3d 703 · Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · Nov 21, 2002

Durst, and Officer Castaneda in their individual capacities, we must decide whether the officers are entitled to qualified immunity. … In determining whether qualified immunity applies in the context of excessive force, we look to whether the plaintiff has suffered (1) an injury (2) which resulted directly and only from the use of force that was clearly

Furfaro v. City of Seattle

97 Wash. App. 537 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 27, 1999

Qualified immunity is a judicially created doctrine protecting government officials from civil liability for performing discretionary functions “insofar as their *552 conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Once a defendant properly raises the issue of qualified immunity, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the right allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of the occurrence at issue. Anderson v.

Kerpelman v. Bricker

23 Md. App. 628 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 16, 1974

It is distinguished from a qualified privilege in that the former provides immunity irrespective of the purposes or motive of the defendant or the reasonableness of his conduct, while the *630 latter is conditioned upon the … Clearly the filing of the complaint in this case initiated a judicial proceeding by setting in motion the grievance procedure.

Callahan v. Circuit City Stores, Inc.

971 So. 2d 1116 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 10, 2007

Plaintiffs sought damages for defamation, false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution. [2] Circuit City answered the petition asserting several affirmative defenses, including qualified immunity for those … APPLICABLE LEGAL PRECEPTS Liability and Qualified Immunity As stated above, all of Callahan and Cousan's claims for damages are based on *1119 the misidentification of them as perpetrators of a shoplifting at the Circuit

City of Claremont v. Kruse

177 Cal. App. 4th 1153 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 27, 2009

The MMP also “immunizes from prosecution a range of conduct ancillary to the provision of medical marijuana to qualified patients. [Citation.]” (People v. … It accords additional immunities to qualified patients, holders of valid identification cards, and primary caregivers who “collectively or cooperatively cultivate marijuana for medical purposes.” (§ 11362.775.)

Fremont Compensation Insurance v. Superior Court

44 Cal. App. 4th 867 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 23, 1996

Section 1877.5 affords insurers a qualified, immunity to report workers’ compensation fraud to a local prosecutor or the Department of Insurance. The qualified immunity does not extend to reports made in bad faith. … The interest groups and lobbyists who fought for only a qualified immunity in section 1877.5 had no reason to concede that insurers already had more than a qualified immunity to report workers’ compensation fraud.

Akron v. J.B.

2019 Ohio 2203 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 5, 2019

In doing so, we have noted that the terms of R.C. 2925.11(B)(2) are unambiguous: The plain language of R.C. 2925.11(B)(2)(b) clearly provides qualified individuals with immunity for a minor drug possession … The statute provides for qualified and conditional immunity; it places the burden on an eligible and “qualified individual” seeking a grant of immunity to demonstrate that he or she has sought and obtained the required

Kinnard v. United Regional Health Care System

194 S.W.3d 54 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 11, 2006

Kinnard has alleged valid claims for defamation and tortious business interference against appellees, 7 the claims are barred by qualified immunity. … To support their qualified immunity defense, appellees submitted affidavits from members of United Regional’s Board of Directors, the peer review committee, and the appellate review committee.

Dunbar v. Strimas

632 S.W.2d 558 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Dec 4, 1981

T.C.A., § 38— 712, grants a qualified immunity to the medical examiner. He is immune from suits for damages based on his performance of statutory duties as long as he performs in good faith. … Toledo, 446 U.S. 635 , 100 S.Ct. 1920 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980), elaborates on the efficacy of good faith immunities: [Wjhether such immunity has been established depends on facts peculiarly within the knowledge and control

Wallace v. Smyth

327 Ill. App. 3d 411 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 18, 2001

The court also relied on the legislature’s grant of a limited form of parental immunity to teachers as support for the extension of a qualified form of parental immunity to foster parents. … It would be anomalous to grant a qualified immunity to educators and biological parents but to deny immunity entirely to foster parents, who, in their relationships with their foster children, share many important similarities

People v. Clark

230 Cal. App. 4th 490 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 9, 2014

’s status as a qualified patient or primary caregiver prior to his or her arrest.” … It is well established that immunity from arrest is exceptional, and, when granted, ordinarily is granted expressly. (See generally 4 Witkin & Epstein, Cal.

Taylor v. Campbell

320 Ga. App. 362 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Mar 14, 2013

The trial court denied the motion, giving rise to this appeal. 3 The doctrine of official immunity, also known as qualified immunity, offers public officers and employees limited protection from suit in their personal capacity … Qualified immunity protects individual public agents from personal liability for discretionary actions taken within the scope of their official authority, and done without wilfulness, malice, or corruption.

Nodoushani v. Southern Connecticut State University

Connecticut Appellate Court · Aug 5, 2014

App. 44, 53, 19 A.3d 215 (2011). 7 ‘‘A [governmental] defendant will be entitled to qualified immunity if either (1) his actions did not violate clearly established law or (2) it was objectively reasonable for him … to believe that his actions did not violate clearly established law.’’

Crisp County School District v. Pheil

231 Ga. App. 139 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Feb 27, 1998

It is well established that, in the absence of some special circumstance, claims against a public school district and its officials in their official capacity are barred by sovereign immunity. Ga. Const, of 1983, Art. … The Pheils attempt to avoid the scope of Georgia’s sovereign immunity law by making a claim under the Federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 USC § 794 . 3 The Act provides in pertinent part: “No otherwise qualified individual

Qualified Patients Assn. v. City of Anaheim

187 Cal. App. 4th 734 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 18, 2010

immunity under [the CUA]. … Second, while it is true that legislation may not immunize a business from Unruh Civil Rights Act claims for discrimination that occurs in that establishment (see Gibson , at p. 1093, relying on Orloff v.

Com. v. Nunez, O.

238 A.3d 420 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 14, 2020

Further, “[t]he burden of proof under the [Act] is not on the Commonwealth; rather, the defendant must establish that he is entitled to immunity under the Act.” Commonwealth v. … In sum, because Appellant did not qualify for immunity under the Act, the trial court properly denied Appellant’s motion to dismiss. We therefore affirm his judgment of sentence.