Case law

Reymond v. State ex rel. Department of Highways

217 So. 2d 488 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 16, 1968

Thus the rule established permits recovery in these cases only where there is substantial proof of special damages shown. … Karl Snyder, another qualified real estate appraiser, testified as an expert on behalf of defendant, Department of Highways. Mr.

Ross v. Mauro Chevrolet

308 Ill. Dec. 248 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 28, 2006

and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/1 — 101 et seq. … Defendants also contended that the officers’ establishment of probable cause provided them with qualified immunity against the section 1983 claims.

Bailey v. Honda Motor Co.

144 A.D.2d 119 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 20, 1988

funding constraints prevented it from placing temporary or permanent markings (see, Friedman v State of New York, 67 NY2d 271, 287 ) and submitted no evidence to establish that the decision involved the expertise of qualified … immunity.

O'BRIEN v. Township of Ralpho

166 Pa. Commw. 337 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 29, 1994

as an adjudication and that the incident report in this case qualifies as such. … , immunities, duties, liabilities, or obligations.

State v. Birdsong

452 So. 2d 1236 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 6, 1984

Montana, 421 So.2d 895 (La. 1982) established the rule that a qualified expert witness cannot express to the jury an expert opinion on an ultimate question of fact to be determined by the jury. … Here, Philander Birdsong is clearly a potential target of prosecution. Hence, the trial judge correctly denied defense witness immunity in this case. Therefore, we find this assignment of error to be without merit.

Poole v. Inlow

80 Ohio App. 3d 379 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 27, 1992

R.C. 307.05 specifically refers to counties, townships and municipal corporations, all of which clearly qualify as political subdivisions. See R.C. 2744.01(F). … An EMT employed by a nonprofit corporation not owned or operated by a political subdivision is protected by the immunity provided in R.C. 3303.21(D) and is immune only while operating an ambulance.

McCord v. City of New York

298 A.D.2d 438 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 15, 2002

The Supreme Court granted the respondents’ motion for summary judgment, concluding, among other things, that the decision to lock the doors was protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Consequently, the doctrine of qualified immunity is applicable and the Supreme Court properly granted the respondents’ motion. Altman, J.P., Smith, H. Miller and Adams, JJ., concur.

Lombard Public Facilities Corp. v. Department of Revenue

378 Ill. App. 3d 921 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 9, 2008

Act (Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/1 — 101.1 (West 2000)). … The burden to prove entitlement to the governmental body exemption was on LPFC, and it did not clearly establish that section 2 — 5(11) of the Retailers’ Tax Act applies to a corporate entity created by a governmental body

Bailey v. Board of County Com'rs

659 So. 2d 295 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 20, 1994

With regard to the claim of several defendants for qualified immunity, [4] the court granted some defendants qualified immunity while denying it to others. … civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. [5] The district court recited further that under Monell , unless

Tamm v. Burns

25 Conn. App. 468 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Aug 13, 1991

All construction activity was performed on state property and therefore the doctrine of sovereign immunity bars this action unless it qualifies under one of three exceptions to the doctrine. … The plaintiff can benefit from this exception only if the complaint clearly alleges facts showing that the exception is applicable. Barde v. Board of Trustees, 207 Conn. 59 , 539 A.2d 1000 (1988).

The Delaware Call v. Delaware State Police

Superior Court of Delaware · Sep 4, 2025

As such, he contends that Delaware Call qualifies as a plaintiff, who brought an action, who can recover fees. Mr. … (emphasis added). 99 Under Delaware jurisprudence, “it is well established that ‘a court may not engraft upon a statute language which has clearly been excluded therefrom.’” Leatherbury v.

Dopkeen v. Whitaker

399 Ill. App. 3d 682 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 10, 2010

The court concluded, “Defendant was acting within the scope of his authority to terminate the plaintiff and such actions are protected by absolute immunity, and public official immunity.” … We note that this case also raises the issue whether the doctrine of sovereign immunity precluded jurisdiction in this case.

ASM Global, LLC D/B/A Destination El Paso and ASM Global Parent, Inc. v. Jessica Weaver, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of A.M., a Minor

Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) · Oct 4, 2024

In two issues, ASM contends the trial court erred in failing to recognize its entitlement to governmental immunity, either as a purported arm of city government, or as derivatively established due to its operation of certain … ASM responded with a plea to the jurisdiction asserting its entitlement to governmental immunity, and it further asserted that no immunity waiver applied.

DePietro v. Department of Public Safety

126 Conn. App. 414 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Feb 8, 2011

First and foremost, we repeat that the burden is on the plaintiff to establish a statutory waiver of sovereign immunity. … The plaintiffs pleading establishes neither. Accordingly, the court properly determined that sovereign immunity barred the plaintiffs action for monetary damages.

Brown v. North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources

212 N.C. App. 337 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 7, 2011

its immunity from suit.” … The decision “whether an employee is exempt under the Act is primarily a question of fact which must be reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard....” Blackmon v.

Fidelty Security Life Insurance v. State

188 Ariz. 283 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Apr 29, 1997

Given this directive, we should construe immunity provisions narrowly, not broadly, "with a view to finding immunity only if it clearly applies." Schabel, 186 Ariz. at 189, 920 P.2d at 44. … The magnitude or importance of an agency's general responsibilities does not establish the agency's entitlement to absolute immunity.

Lake Point Tower Garage Ass'n v. Property Tax Appeal Board

Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 11, 2004

The defendant municipality argued that section 3-106 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act) applied: "Neither a local public entity nor a public employee is liable for an … Springfield argued that the school was immune from the suit based on section 3-106.

James v. City of Cincinnati, C-070367 (6-6-2008)

2008 Ohio 2708 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 6, 2008

Breach of Duty {¶ 29} To establish negligence, James and McCabe had to prove that the City had breached its duty of care. … Immunity {¶ 32} The trial court also determined that the City, even if it was negligent, was immune from liability. We disagree.

Steinbrink v. Greenon Local School Dist.

2012 Ohio 1438 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 30, 2012

{¶ 41} Intentional torts, because the do not occur within the employment relationship, are beyond the reach of the authority conferred on the General Assembly by Section 35, Article II of the Ohio Constitution to establish … are barred by the applicable statute of limitations, R.C. 2305.11; that the operative facts alleged in the complaint are insufficient to plead a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress on the standards established

State v. Dukes

Court of Appeals of Kansas · Feb 12, 2021

After a defendant in a criminal case files a motion requesting immunity under K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-5231, the State must come forward with evidence establishing probable cause that the defendant's use of force was not statutorily … And the district court must act as the gatekeeper to "insulate . . . qualifying cases from continued prosecution and trial." 2021 WL 137563, at *7.