Case law

Glynn v. City of Kissimmee

383 So. 2d 774 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 21, 1980

In this case the alleged statements were clearly defamatory in nature. Alexrod v. Califano, 357 So.2d 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). … Drennen rejected "absolute immunity" for communication between employees of the same employer and remanded the issue for trial. [2] McNayr v. Kelly, 184 So.2d 428 (Fla. 1966).

State of Texas v. Alexandra Alvarez, Joshua LaFountain, and Dr. Christine Ellis, D.D.S.

Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District · Apr 7, 2026

In the State’s prior appeal challenging the denial of its plea to the jurisdiction, the State argued that there was no showing that “the TMFPA clearly and unambiguously waives sovereign immunity to permit their claims against … Kitsap Physicians Servs., 163 F.3d 516, 525 (9th Cir. 1999) (explaining that “firsthand knowledge” is needed to establish direct knowledge).

Bullard v. Wake County

221 N.C. App. 522 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 17, 2012

Turning to the merits of that affirmative defense, it is well established that the mere purchase of insurance standing alone does not waive a county’s sovereign immunity. … The defense of sovereign immunity *528 clearly applies to bar plaintiff's claims.” Id. at 597 , 655 S.E.2d at 924 .

Santo v. Genesis Healthcare, Inc.

Superior Court of Delaware · May 16, 2023

Delaware courts have treated other forms of immunity from suit, such as sovereign immunity or immunity under the State Tort Claims Act, as implicating subject matter jurisdiction.24 That the PREP Act provides immunity from … countermeasure or another was used at the facility—thermometers, examination gowns, surgical apparel, etc.”50 That argument, the Court reasoned, “confuses suits over the administration of a countermeasure itself—which is clearly

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).

Kaminski v. Semple

Connecticut Appellate Court · Mar 17, 2020

The plaintiff does not clearly address the immunity arguments regarding Semple. The parties were heard on the motion on July 30, 2018. … the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.’’

Towery v. State of California

California Court of Appeal · Aug 10, 2017

Civil Code section 52.1 does not address the immunity established by Government Code section 844.6. … 42 United States Code section 1983 unless the officer has violated a ‗clearly established‘ constitutional right.‖ (Venegas II, supra, 153 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1241–1242, quoting Saucier v.

Patrick Laselva v. City of Boston

Massachusetts Superior Court · Sep 20, 2021

To establish tort immunity under Section 17C, therefore, the Defendant must demonstrate each of four specific things: -8- (1) That the City owns the land on which the Plaintiff’s injury occurred; (2) That the Plaintiff was … The City Engaged in No Conduct That Was Wilful, Wanton or Reckless The summary judgment record demonstrating that the City qualifies for the tort immunity conferred by the Recreational Use Statute, the Plaintiff’s claims

Southworth v. State

62 A.D.2d 731 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 2, 1978

The trial court was clearly in error in holding that one convicted of driving while intoxicated was automatically ineligible for the Onondaga program. Quite the opposite was true. … The soundness of the established method of operation is beyond review (Kelly v State of New York, 57 AD2d 320, 328, 332 ) for the reason that such review would constitute a judicial incursion into the immunized area of basic

Powell v. Milwaukee Area Technical College District Board

225 Wis. 2d 794 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · Mar 23, 1999

We affirm the trial court's ruling, concluding that, after applying the legal tests to the undisputed facts, Zauner was a loaned employee of MATC engaged in a discretionary act which qualified him for immunity pursuant to … Zauner and MATC were immune from suit pursuant to § 893.80, Stats.

Wheeler v. Boston Housing Authority

34 Mass. App. Ct. 36 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Jan 25, 1993

L. c. 258, § 10(6), if the defendant’s conduct in this case qualifies as a discretionary function. Commesso v. Hingham Hous. Authy., 399 Mass. 805, 807 (1987). Ayala v. Boston Hous. … the lights at night — actions which were ruled to be clearly discretionary under the Federal Tort Claims Act); Marbley v.

Clawson v. Wharton County

941 S.W.2d 267 · Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Jan 16, 1997

In the Clawson suit, the defendants moved for summary judgment by asserting absolute prosecutorial immunity, qualified “good faith” immunity, and sovereign immunity. … In the subsequent Chambers suit, defendants also asserted absolute immunity, sovereign immunity, and no constitutional cause of action, but abandoned the qualified immunity defense.

Tallaksen v. Ross

167 N.J. Super. 1 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 7, 1979

Defendant's 70-acre undeveloped tract qualifies for immunity under the act when used for the statutorily defined recreational purposes, despite its zoning classification as residential lands and its proximity to developed … Clearly, plaintiff's recreational activities on defendant's undeveloped land represented the fulfillment of the legislative objective and, consistent *5 with the act's promise of immunity with respect to such use, defendant's

GUTSTEIN v. City of Evanston

402 Ill. App. 3d 610 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 4, 2010

The trial court determined, after hearing all of the evidence presented to the jury, that the City had failed to establish that it qualified for discretionary immunity under the Act. 745 ILCS 10/2 — 201 ( West 2008 ). … The City has the burden of proving that it qualifies for discretionary immunity and the City failed to meet that burden. Van Meter, 207 Ill. 2d at 370 .

Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board v. Funderburk

188 S.W.3d 233 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 26, 2006

Thus, the law is settled that the TCHRA clearly and unambiguously waives governmental immunity for the governmental entities that are statutorily defined as employers. … The DFW Board appears to argue that the TCHRA must clearly and unambiguously waive governmental immunity specifically as to it. We cannot agree with this contention.

State v. Abdi

236 Ariz. 609 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Feb 26, 2015

¶10 With defined exceptions, the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act provides immunity from prosecution to a registered qualifying patient for 2 We cite to the current versions of the statutes, which have not been … ¶11 The Act gives a qualifying patient issued a registry identification card by another state the same presumptions and immunities when she visits Arizona. A.R.S. § 36-2804.03(C).

Willey v. Springfield Twp.

2026 Ohio 1842 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 20, 2026

R.C. 2744.01(C)(2). {¶72} “When it has been determined that a party generally qualifies for immunity due to its status as a political subdivision, the second tier of the analysis is to determine whether one of … In response, Willey asserted the Springfield Township employees were not entitled to qualified immunity because (1) there was no probable cause to justify Willey’s arrest and prosecution, and (2) officers denied Willey

Redcross v. State

241 A.D.2d 787 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 24, 1997

It is also well settled that “in the field of traffic design engineering, the State is accorded a qualified immunity from liability arising out of a highway planning decision” (Friedman v State of New York, supra, at 283) … “Under this doctrine of qualified immunity, a governmental body may be held liable when its study of a traffic condition is plainly inadequate or there is no reasonable basis for its traffic plan” (id., at 284 [citation omitted

Whitney v. Jersey Cent. Power & Light

240 N.J. Super. 420 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 1, 1990

The Act, in our view, would clearly go beyond these goals were it construed to grant a blanket *424 immunity to all property owners, particularly to those owning lands in densely populated urban or suburban areas, without … The Supreme Court made this statement in concluding that a reservoir, which probably would qualify for the immunity provided by the Act if located in an undeveloped area, does not enjoy that immunity if it is located in the

Johnson v. Baldrick, Ca2007-01-013 (4-14-2008)

2008 Ohio 1794 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 14, 2008

Appellees and the trial court conflate the distinct concepts of duty and immunity. Immunity does not extinguish a duty. Immunity serves to remove liability if the duty is violated. … faith can show that the official acted in willful, reckless or wanton disregard of rights established under law."