Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.88s
2017 Ohio 8983 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 13, 2017
“We look to the plain and ordinary meaning of the language used in the policy unless another meaning is clearly apparent from the contents of the policy.” Galatis at ¶ 11. … The plain and ordinary meaning of “privilege,” however, is “a right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor * * *.”
Cited 1 timesPublishedCity of Treasure Island v. PROVIDENT MGMT.
738 So. 2d 357 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 11, 1999
Because there were few, if any, comparable sales of such businesses to use as a benchmark for the fair market value of the business, Provident's qualified expert relied upon total capitalized net cash flow to establish a … As Provident argues, it is difficult to square this holding with a determination that total immunity exists. We have struggled with the nature of a claim for wrongful injunction. It clearly is not a claim in contract.
Cited 5 timesPublishedZaragoza v. Board of Johnson County Comm'rs
Court of Appeals of Kansas · Jun 21, 2024
Zaragoza argues that the library does not qualify for recreational use immunity because the County failed to establish that the library is an open area intended or permitted to be used for nonincidental recreational purposes … Uncontroverted evidence establishes that the library was intended to be, has been, and continues to be used for recreational purposes, qualifying the library for recreational use immunity.
Cited 0 timesPublishedPeople of Michigan v. Iskandar Manuel
Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 18, 2017
A qualifying patient or primary caregiver who possesses more marijuana than allowed under § 4(a) and § 4(b) cannot establish the second element of immunity. … Finally, to establish the fourth element of § 4 immunity, a defendant must prove that he or she was engaged in the medical use of marijuana. Hartwick, 498 Mich at 219.
Cited 0 timesPublished2012 Ohio 5152 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 7, 2012
. {¶3} The Cincinnati Retirement System was established by ordinance in 1931. … And in 2001, the municipal code was amended to include, in part, “[s]uch Qualified Medical Benefits and the level of Qualified Medical Benefits payments payable by the Retirement System are also subject to reduction, increase
Cited 2 timesPublished10 Fla. L. Weekly 1060 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 25, 1985
Hewiett determined that Long Street did not qualify as a "street" under the city's zoning and subdivision ordinances contained in the city code. … In order for the trier of fact to determine this issue, assuming the trial court finds liability can be established under the allegations of the complaint as presently framed ( Cf.
Cited 8 timesPublishedMarqueth Wilson v. Texas Workers' Compensation Commission
Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler) · Nov 13, 2003
Wilson's third and fourth issues, as well as certain arguments in his first issue, relate to official immunity and qualified immunity. … A party can establish consent by referencing a statute or a legislative resolution clearly and unambiguously granting consent. Id. ; University of Texas Med. Branch v. York , 871 S.W.2d 175, 177 (Tex. 1994).
Cited 0 timesPublishedBurge v. Exelon Generation Company, LLC
2015 IL App (2d) 141090 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 15, 2015
Plaintiffs assert that Wendt “may be qualified to testify that Defendant actually footed the bill for [Rick’s] benefits, but not that it was required to do so.” … The plaintiffs alleged that the employees who attempted to replace the valve were not qualified to do so.
Cited 9 timesPublished509 N.W.2d 561 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Dec 14, 1993
On February 17, 1993, MnDOT moved for summary judgment based on qualified official immunity and absolute immunity. … Official immunity, however, does not protect an employee who willfully violates a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable *565 person would have known. Johnson v.
Overruled in part by Stresemann v. Jesson, 2015 Minn. LEXIS 424 (2015)Cited 3 timesPublishedLewis v. Department of Human Resources
255 Ga. App. 805 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jun 13, 2002
To establish proximate cause, a plaintiff must show a legally attributable causal connection between the defendant’s conduct and the alleged injury. … In addition, the language of the statute clearly provides that the state waives sovereign immunity as to injuries resulting from the exercise of inspection powers or functions only when the facility or property at issue is
Cited 19 timesPublished231 Ariz. 584 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Mar 13, 2013
Certain of the 1993 amendments clearly repudiate portions of this court’s reasoning in Walker. … Tohono O’Odham Nation Gaming Enter., 212 Ariz. 167, n.2, 129 P.3d 78, 80 n.2 (App. 2006) (trial court determines whether facts sufficient to establish immunity if no disputed factual issues); Link v.
Cited 7 timesPublished541 S.W.3d 908 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 11, 2018
Mouton brought several allegations relating to inadequate security: that TSU did not provide enough security, hired incompetent security personnel that were not properly qualified or trained, failed to adequately supervise … ("[N]owhere does the petition allege facts to establish a nexus between the lifeguard stations or chairs and [the] injury.
Cited 8 timesPublishedNicholas v. North Colorado Medical Center, Inc.
1999 Colo. J. C.A.R. 6603 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Dec 9, 1999
However, as if the statutory immunity were insufficient, the CPRA also tries to qualify the peer review process as "state action" exempt from liability under the Sherman Act. … To the contrary, we conclude as a matter of law that NCMC's procedure violated Nicholas' due process right to a fair and impartial determination by the Board, a clearly established right. See deKoevend v.
Cited 5 timesPublishedTexas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · Jun 14, 2006
"Official immunity" is one of several interchangeable terms, including "quasi-judicial immunity," "qualified immunity," "discretionary immunity," and "good faith immunity," used to refer to an affirmative defense available … Because Munoz only sued the individual defendants under state law claims, we look only to state law to determine whether they established official immunity.
Cited 0 timesPublishedIntermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia · Jun 6, 2025
We believe, in cases of qualified or statutory immunity, court ordered replies and motions for a more definite statement under Rule 12(e) can speed the judicial process. … Next, the court may, on its own discretion, insist that the plaintiff file a reply tailored to an answer pleading the defense of statutory or qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesPublished2023 NY Slip Op 04031 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 28, 2023
Plaintiffs further contend that, although defendants established that Cai's written statements are subject to a qualified privilege, plaintiffs raised an issue of fact whether the statements were made with malice, which would … "A qualified privilege 'places the burden of proof on this issue [of malice] upon the plaintiff' " ( id. , quoting Toker , 44 NY2d at 219).
Cited 1 timesPublishedR.K. v. Little Miami Golf Ctr.
2013 Ohio 4939 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 8, 2013
Plaintiffs argue that the Park District does not qualify as a political subdivision because (1) a “park district” created under R.C. … Therefore, the Park District has established immunity on Plaintiffs’ claim for failure to provide staff. {¶42} In summary, as to Counts Three through Six, the Park District is not entitled to immunity on Plaintiffs
Cited 31 timesPublished271 N.J. Super. 192 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 28, 1994
A state legislature is free to restrict or qualify that right, so long as it does not create an arbitrary or discriminatory classification scheme. Woodard v. … Clearly, N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-29 does not mention "derivative use" immunity.
Cited 12 timesPublishedMissouri Court of Appeals · Feb 23, 2021
Thus, the face of the First Amended Petition does not clearly establish that McReynolds and Coombs treated Cameron in a true emergency situation. … CONCLUSION In conclusion, the First Amended Petition properly pleads the recognized exception to the doctrine of official immunity and the affirmative defenses asserted by Defendants are not clearly established on the
Cited 0 timesPublishedPenllyn Greene Associates, L.P. v. Clouser
890 A.2d 424 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 28, 2005
Whether Residents are Immune from Liability Under the Act for Tortious Interference with Contract Before any review concerning the relevance of the exceptions, Residents must allege facts, which if believed, would establish … While the Act clearly contemplates a hearing process where an evidentiary record is established and findings made therefrom, the Act does not provide the standard to be applied by the trial court in deciding the issue.
Cited 10 timesPublished
Ask Donna