Case law

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.’’

Jeffrey M. Miller and Cynthia S. Miller v. Federal Express Corporation and 500 Festival, Inc.

6 N.E.3d 1006 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 3, 2014

Here, the designated evidence clearly establishes that both 500 Festival and FedEx provide or enable computer access for multiple users on their respective computer networks to access the Internet by means of the servers … Of course, simply because the defendants here have established that they are providers of an interactive computer service does not mean that they are automatically immune from suits.

Bennett v. Columbiana Cty. Coroner

2016 Ohio 7182 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 30, 2016

Clearly, this record does not support Appellant’s contentions that she be regarded as a whistleblower. … Graham in his individual capacity, we must analyze whether immunity applies pursuant to R.C. 2744.03(A)(6). Subsection (C) clearly does not apply. We must look to whether Dr.

Wilson Ciceron and Rosie Ciceron v. Sunbelt Rentals, Inc.

163 So. 3d 609 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 15, 2015

Thus, Ciceron maintains that Sunbelt failed to qualify as a subcontractor and therefore, was not entitled to horizontal immunity. … Sunbelt’s opposing argument is that the trial court correctly found that it qualified for worker’s compensation immunity as a subcontractor, asserting that in addition to providing the scissor lifts to Associated Industries

Pacific Air Lines, Inc. v. Superior Court

231 Cal. App. 2d 587 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 7, 1965

Every statement in the document before us is declared “under penalty of perjury,” and clearly is vouched for by declarant. … They seek to expand this rule to require negation of contract venue, even when the complaint clearly states a cause of action in tort alone.

ck v. McNabb

2020 COA 133 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Sep 3, 2020

view, the undisputed facts that McNabb (1) was responding to an emergency call, (2) was at a complete stop before entering the intersection, and (3) had activated his overhead lights before entering the intersection established … Instead, the statute requires the driver to slow down “as may be necessary for safe operation.” 8 ¶ 16 Ignoring that qualifier reads it out of the statute, rendering the

Augustin Rivera, Jr., Teresa Ereon Giltner, Harold Odom, Barbara Ellis, Anna M. McKim, Cynthia Eva Hujar Orr, C. Alfred MacKenzie, Dwaine M. Massey, and Carlos R. Soltero, in Their Official Capacities as Members of the Texas Board of Law Examiners v. Deborah Sonnenschein

Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District · Jan 23, 2025

The Third Court of Appeals reversed and dismissed all her claims with prejudice except for the two equal protection claims, holding them insufficient to establish a waiver of immunity as pleaded but allowing her a chance … That individual graduates are qualified to sit for a bar exam is not the same as finding a law school qualified for accreditation. See CAL.

Holbrook v. Executive Conference Center, Inc.

219 Ga. App. 104 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Nov 17, 1995

After a period of discovery, Executive filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that plaintiffs “cannot establish a prima facie case of negligence.” … The purpose of the [ordinance in the case sub judice] is clearly to protect any [invitee bather] who might suddenly have need of a life [line], regardless of whether he or she enters the water voluntarily or involuntarily

Skrobacz v. Sweeney

49 Conn. Supp. 15 · Connecticut Superior Court · Oct 1, 2003

The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability if the official’s conduct did not violate constitutional rights that were clearly established at the pertinent time or if it was objectively … As a general rule, police officers are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe their acts did

Erickson v. Canyons School District

467 P.3d 917 · Court of Appeals of Utah · Jun 11, 2020

Courts apply a three-part test when determining whether a governmental entity is immune from suit under the Governmental Immunity Act of Utah. … Indeed, the focus of Wagner was not on this aspect of the intent requirement of battery, namely what mental state short of absolute intent might qualify as intent for purposes of battery.

Pendergrass v. State

74 Or. App. 209 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 3, 1985

ORS 482.260 is not self-executing; MVD can fulfill the statute’s requirements only if it establishes procedures to do so. … Although the question is closer, we also conclude that paragraph h does not allege conduct that comes within defendants’ discretionary acts immunity.

Milgram v. ORBITZ WORLDWIDE, INC.

419 N.J. Super. 305 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 26, 2010

As a result, plaintiffs submit that the CDA's immunity provisions are unavailable to defendants because they qualify as "information content providers" under the Act. … The language of § 230 sets forth three criteria to qualify for the immunity provided. First, immunity is available only to a "provider or user of an interactive computer service." 47 U.S.C.A. § 230 (c)(1).

Hutchinson v. Miller

548 So. 2d 883 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 14, 1989

In the light of this holding, it is unnecessary to discuss the question of qualified immunity of the individual officers. … Instead, plaintiffs sue on allegations of negligence in performance of established duties, and for failure to follow the policies already established.

Jason Graham v. Cobb County, Georgia

Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jul 11, 2012

(ii) Official Immunity Under the doctrine of official, or qualified, immunity, law enforcement officers may be personally liable for negligent actions taken in the performance of ministerial functions … beneficiary of a contract made between other parties for his benefit may maintain an action against the promisor on the contract.”22 “In order for a third party to have standing to enforce a contract[,] . . . it must clearly

Nichele Giron v. Justin Hice

Colorado Court of Appeals · Jul 28, 2022

¶ 14 Thus, “[i]t is well-established that the application of sovereign immunity [under the CGIA] presents a mixed question of fact and law.” Maphis v. City of Boulder, 2022 CO 10, ¶ 14. … “[W]e defer to the district court’s factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous.” Id. A factual finding is clearly erroneous when it lacks no support in the record. Whiting-Turner Contracting Co. v.

Harris County Texas v. Kassandra Deary

Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Jan 23, 2024

Under Texas law, governmental units, including counties, are generally entitled to governmental immunity from suit and liability unless the state legislature has clearly and unambiguously waived immunity. … Nowhere else did the County address immunity regarding Deary’s Section 1983 claims. Federal law clearly establishes that Harris County does not have immunity under Section 1983.

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

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

McPherson v. Fitzpatrick

63 Mich. App. 461 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 14, 1975

Plaintiff would apply "the doctrine of the last antecedent” which provides that qualifying words and phrases refer only to the last antecedent where no contrary intention appears. … "(c) 'State’ means the state of Michigan and its agencies, departments, and commissions, and shall include every public university and college of the state, whether established as a constitutional corporation or otherwise

Kathryn M Jasionowski v. Town of Whitestown

Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 21, 2025

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … Whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity is a legal question for the court to resolve. Fort Wayne Cmty. Schs. v. Haney, 94 N.E.3d 325, 331 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018).