Case law

In Re the Welfare of S.J.T.

736 N.W.2d 341 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Jul 31, 2007

We conclude that the district court did not clearly err in its findings or abuse its discretion in its conclusion that appellant failed to establish that retaining appellant in the juvenile court serves public safety. … On this record we conclude that the district court did not clearly err or abuse its discretion by determining that appellant failed to establish that retaining appellant in the juvenile court serves public safety and by certifying

Malone v. State

221 So. 3d 1153 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · Jun 3, 2016

Thus, to be entitled to immunity, an accused who claims that he or she was justified in using deadly force must establish compliance with subsection (a) (and any other applicable provision of § 13A-3-23). … Additionally, regarding the duty to retreat, the accused seeking immunity under subsection (d) for the use of justified deadly force may either (1) establish that he or she complied with the common-law rule regarding the

Cabrera v. JBS USA, LLC

568 S.W.3d 865 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Feb 8, 2019

Workers' Compensation Immunity a. … Accordingly, Monfort's current status as JBS's subsidiary is largely meaningless: Unless Monfort qualified in its own right as Cabrera's employer or up-the-ladder contractor, it was not entitled to immunity from tort liability

Jackson Ex Rel. Essien v. Unified School District No. 259

29 Kan. App. 2d 826 · Court of Appeals of Kansas · Sep 21, 2001

Before determining that a statute is unconstitutional, the statute must clearly appear to violate the Constitution. State ex rel. Tomasic v. Unified Gov. of Wyandotte Co. … Just as the court in Wright held as a matter of law, a room with similar characteristics qualified for the recreational use exception. We hold that the room in this case qualified for the recreational use exception.

Hsu v. Trinidad Navarro

Superior Court of Delaware · Oct 28, 2025

The Court considers “the nature of the plaintiff’s claims, requests for compensatory or punitive damages, and the nature of any defenses raised in response to the complaint, particularly claims of qualified immunity.”26 … C. § 10005(b).51 Accordingly, Hsu cannot establish a clear legal right to mandamus. V.

Iverson v. Muroc Unified School District

32 Cal. App. 4th 218 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 6, 1995

In this case we address the question whether Government Code section 831.7, 1 which provides qualified immunity to public entities and public employees for injuries sustained by a person during “hazardous recreational activity … 846, sought to give a public entity and its employees specific qualified immunity from *224 liability for injuries due to defined “hazardous recreational activity” on public property.

Texas A&M University, Mark Hussey, Ph.D. in His Official Capacity as Interim President of Texas A&M and David Vaught, Ph.D., Individually and in His Official Capacity as Department Head of Department History v. Ernest Starks, Ph.D.

500 S.W.3d 560 · Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco) · Jul 27, 2016

Vaught next argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for summary judgment because he conclusively established that he was entitled to official immunity. … Therefore, it is this conduct, the conduct that is alleged in Starks’s free-speech retaliation claim, for which Vaught seeks to establish official immunity and for which he must therefore establish constitutes discretionary

Harstad v. Whiteman

338 S.W.3d 804 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Mar 4, 2011

Harstad confuses the qualified privilege applicable here and the absolute privilege of the intra-corporate immunity rule. … There is no such presumption with the qualified privilege which Biber itself distinguished from the intra-corporate immunity rule.

Jones v. New Hanover Memorial Hospital

55 N.C. App. 545 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 2, 1982

In an exhaustively detailed analysis showing which states accorded charitable hospitals full immunity, qualified immunity, or no immunity, the Rabón Court characterized North Carolina as one of the “[¿Jurisdictions in which … immunity is qualified.” 269 N.C. at 17-18 , 152 S.E. 2d at 46 .

McDougald v. ODRC

2018 Ohio 2315 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 14, 2018

The trial court erred by converting plaintiff[']s claims into constitutional claims when he clearly stated a state tort claim for invasion of privacy claim. [II.] … Delie, 257 F.3d 309, 317 (3d Cir.2001) (finding defendants entitled to qualified immunity, and noting that an inmate's right to privacy of medical information "is subject to substantial restrictions and limitations in order

Sage v. Williams

23 Kan. App. 2d 624 · Court of Appeals of Kansas · Mar 7, 1997

To escape the defense of qualified immunity, Sage had to allege that the County and its employees violated clearly established law. See Hinton v. City of Elwood, Kan., 997 F.2d 774, 779 (10th Cir. 1993). … As a result, qualified immunity protected the County and its employees from liability.

Ligoure v. City of New York

128 A.D.3d 1027 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 27, 2015

Such burden is met “by identifying the particular material with respect to which the privilege is asserted and establishing with specificity that the material was prepared exclusively in anticipation of litigation” (Ural … Here, the appellants failed to meet their burden of establishing that the requested material was prepared solely in anticipation of litigation and, therefore, is protected from disclosure by *1029 the qualified immunity privilege

People v. Gibson

165 Cal. App. 2d 685 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 4, 1958

The question was apparently asked in an effort to prove that the statements made by Gibson to the investigating officers were elicited by means of promises of immunity. … Christensen’s apartment, the fingerprint evidence clearly established Gibson’s presence at the scene. The fact that Mrs.

Dauer v. Department of Education

874 A.2d 159 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 12, 2005

Where no right, privilege or immunity is in jeopardy, an agency’s action does not constitute an adjudication. … In this respect, she had no right, privilege or immunity in jeopardy. See Sergi v. Sch.

Biber v. Duplicator Sales & Service, Inc.

155 S.W.3d 732 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Dec 3, 2004

within the employment relationship, Kentucky courts have recognized a qualified privilege. … American National Insurance 18 where the court, faced with an absence of direct case law on the issue, concluded that Kentucky has recognized only a qualified privilege and would reject the intra-corporate immunity rule.

Alvarez v. State of California

95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 719 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 19, 1999

if the State established initial immunity, changed conditions defeated design immunity. … Loss of Design Immunity Early cases construing section 830.6 held that design immunity would apply perpetually even though changed circumstances clearly revealed the defects of the plan.

Cormier v. THE Ins. Co.

716 So. 2d 387 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 27, 1998

DPSC asserts legislative immunity, discretionary immunity, and the public duty doctrine to support this claim. … Voogt testified that as a rehabilitation specialist and counselor, he was not qualified to prescribe treatment or develop a prognosis.

Texas Department of Transportation v. Glenda Reid

Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · Aug 22, 2019

Likewise, whether undisputed evidence of jurisdictional facts establishes a trial court’s jurisdiction is also a question of law. Id. … Sovereign immunity protects The State of Texas and its agencies, such as TxDOT, from lawsuits for damages unless immunity has been waived. Texas Dept. of Transp. v. York, 284 S.W.3d 844, 846 (Tex. 2009) (per curiam).

Corliss v. Varner

934 A.2d 748 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 17, 2007

Clearly, the case was prison conditions litigation. The final exhibit and the most interesting was Exhibit E which was Judge Caputo’s March 21, 2002, order dismissing the case Corliss v. Ben Varner, No. 3:CV-02-0282. … The cases considered by common pleas under the "three strikes rule” were all filed prior to the instant case and, therefore, properly qualified for consideration. 5 .

Andrade v. Ellefson

375 N.W.2d 828 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Dec 30, 1985

State Tort Immunity. … The uncontroverted evidence here establishes that Anoka County owed the appellants a special duty of care. *839 3. Superseding Cause.