Case law

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

Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District · Jul 2, 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).

Hess v. Flores

408 Ill. App. 3d 631 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 31, 2011

Furthermore, plaintiffs argument that section 2—202 of the Tort Immunity Act limits this immunity is clearly no longer tenable. … The court held that this argument was “mere semantics designed to avoid a clearly applicable immunity” and accepting such a position could render section 4—106(b) a nullity. Id. at 11.

Chinwuba v. Larsen

142 Md. App. 327 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 31, 2002

In other tort contexts, Larsen has only a qualified immunity. See CJ § 5-522(b). … This conditional privilege has the same “scope of duty” limitation as an absolute privilege or a qualified immunity.

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. v. LISA S. DULBERG DE MORALES

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 9, 2020

Resha, 648 So. 2d 1187, 1189 (Fla. 1994) (“[A]n order denying qualified immunity is ‘effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment,’ as the public official cannot be ‘re-immunized’ if erroneously required to … Jeffrey, 178 So. 3d 460, 465 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (certiorari available against order denying officer’s assertion of qualified immunity but not against denial of state’s assertion of sovereign immunity, since potentially

Dimarco v. Presbyterian Healthcare Services, Inc.

141 N.M. 735 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Mar 15, 2007

In our ease, Presbyterian clearly has a conditional privilege — at common law, under the terms of the good faith release, and pursuant to Section 50-12-1. Id. … Rather, the opponent must come forward and establish with admissible evidence that a genuine issue of fact exists.”

Catherine E. Scott-Nixon v. Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and the University of Texas at Arlington

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 4, 2012

City of Dallas, 197 S.W.3d 371, 374 (Tex. 2006) (explaining that political subdivisions of State, including cities, are entitled to immunity similar to sovereign immunity that is called governmental immunity). … In Reconveyance, the supreme court also expounded upon what qualifies as an ultra vires suit.

People Ex Rel. Lungren v. Peron

59 Cal. App. 4th 1383 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 12, 1997

Respondents, operating a commercial enterprise selling marijuana to any qualified public purchaser, do not qualify as “ ‘primary caregiver[s]’ ” of each such purchaser under section 11362.5(e) by simply obtaining from the … Respondents do not consistently assume responsibility for the health or safety of their customers qualified for the medicinal use of marijuana, and hence do not qualify as their primary caretakers as contemplated by section

Rodrigues v. City of New York

193 A.D.2d 79 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 21, 1993

Thus, prosecutors acting in an " 'investigative’ ” or " 'administrative’ ” capacity are entitled only to qualified immunity. (Barr v Abrams, 810 F2d 358, 361 [2d Cir 1987].) … (But see, Cunningham v State of New York, 71 AD2d 181, 183 [prosecutor engaged in the role of an investigator "should not enjoy absolute but only qualified immunity”].)

Texas Department of Human Services v. Ara Living Centers of Texas, Inc.

833 S.W.2d 689 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Aug 26, 1992

TDHS also asserts that ARA’s suit is barred by the doctrine of governmental immunity. 1. … Governmental Immunity TDHS also argues that ARA’s suit to obtain declaratory relief is barred by the doctrine of governmental immunity. This assertion is also without merit.

Gast v. State, by and Through Stevenson

36 Or. App. 441 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 2, 1978

Suffice it to say Chapter 330 regulates "fringe benefit” programs established by employers of labor organizations that provide medical and disability benefits and thus clearly comes within the broad definition of "employee … "(b) No State may establish or enforce any law which prevents a health maintenance organization for which a grant, contract, loan, or loan guarantee was made under this subchapter or which is a qualified health maintenance

Loveland v. St. Vrain Valley School District RE-1J

410 P.3d 619 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Sep 24, 2015

Rather, “the condition of an individual zip line on a playground might qualify as a dangerous condition but not as a ‘facility.’” Id. at ¶21. … Vrain II as requiring the Lovelands to assert a physical or structural defect in the zip line, such as a rusty or obstructed track, in order to establish the first prong of the dangerous condition test.

Segreto v. City of Bristol

71 Conn. App. 844 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Aug 27, 2002

act, rather than a ministerial act, and that her claim did not fit within the identifiable person-imminent harm exception to the qualified immunity from liability that a city enjoys for the discretionary acts of its employees … the identifiable person-imminent harm exception to the qualified immunity enjoyed by the city for the discretionary acts of its employees.

Schauer v. Morgan

175 S.W.3d 397 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Sep 7, 2005

The usual limits of the qualified immunity accorded governmental employees does not apply. … the employee in his official capacity—not as barring liability claims made against him in his individual capacity, unless he establishes a qualified official immunity defense.

Wellsboro Area School District v. Tioga County Board for Assessment & Revision of Taxes

651 A.2d 592 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 1994

This appeal raises the question of what, if anything, a School District was required to prove, so as to qualify for an exemption under this statute, once it established that the subject land is annexed to a schoolhouse. … taxation or assessments unless a statute clearly and unequivocally expresses the legislative will that such property shall not be immune: Robb v.

Justin Irwin v. John Bradley Brent

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 19, 2024

The Landry case explained that when the defendant does not enjoy any qualifying privilege or immunity, the courts must perform a comparative fault analysis. … Only when it is established that a defendant’s retaliatory force was unreasonable and not qualifying for a defense or immunity, would a comparative fault analysis be required.

Board of School Commissioners v. Pettigrew

851 N.E.2d 326 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 2006

Because we hold that the Board, Grubb and Torzewski are immune under the doctrine of qualified immunity, we need not reach whether the statements of Grubb and Torzewski were defamatory. … Defamation The Board maintains that even if the statements of Grubb and Torzewski were determined to be defamatory, it is immune to Pettigrew's claim of defamation under the doctrine of qualified privilege.

S. Hoover v. S.A. Stine, PennDOT and the Borough of Waynesboro

153 A.3d 1145 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 15, 2016

Not only has Hoover failed to establish that Waynesboro or PennDOT’s purported negligence caused her injuries, she has failed to establish that the alleged negligence fell within any exception to immunity. … In this case, the z-bricks and concrete headers clearly established the path for pedestrian egress across the highway, just as the painted crosswalk did in Glenn, thereby serving

Clayton v. Branson

170 N.C. App. 438 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 7, 2005

Thus, “unlike various government officials, municipalities do not enjoy immunity from suit — either absolute or qualified — under § 1983. … We conclude that each of these factors, standing alone or considered collectively, clearly bear a rational relationship to legitimate governmental goals.

McDonald v. Denton

63 Tex. Civ. App. 421 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Dec 21, 1910

shall have the right to continually commit certain crimes and continually obtain immunity from punishment. … Clearly, they are legalized within the 'limits denominated the “Reservation,” the very name of which indicates a setting apart for particular purposes.

Catherine E. Scott-Nixon v. Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and the University of Texas at Arlington

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 4, 2012

City of Dallas , 197 S.W.3d 371, 374 (Tex. 2006) (explaining that political subdivisions of State, including cities, are entitled to immunity similar to sovereign immunity that is called governmental immunity). … In Reconveyance , the supreme court also expounded upon what qualifies as an ultra vires suit.