Case law

Leah Campanelli, V. Peacehealth Southwest Medical Center

Court of Appeals of Washington · May 5, 2025

Under ER 702, an expert’s opinion can be qualified by “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.” Whether an expert is qualified to render an opinion is a preliminary finding by the court under ER 104(a). … Establishing cause in fact involves a determination of what actually occurred and is generally left to the jury to decide. Id.

Transky v. Ohio Civil Rights Commission

193 Ohio App. 3d 354 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 15, 2011

If they were acting in the latter capacity, appellants claim that the officials are entitled only to qualified immunity. … , but merely qualified immunity.

Morris v. Harvey Cycle and Camper, Inc.

392 Ill. App. 3d 399 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 12, 2009

“It is established law that a correct decision on erroneous grounds is not a basis for reversal, and is harmless error. … The plaintiff appealed, arguing such immunity “condones and even encourages malicious harassment through police investigations.” Starnes, 184 Ill. App. 3d at 203 .

Jennings v. Hon agne/al-furaji

81 Arizona Cases Digest 7 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Oct 20, 2022

And this petition involves a question of qualified 2  JENNINGS et al. v. … Discretionary Act Immunity ¶14 In the alternative, Petitioners argue that Officer Jennings is entitled to qualified immunity and would be liable only for gross negligence. We agree.

Batt v. Globe Engineering Co.

13 Kan. App. 2d 500 · Court of Appeals of Kansas · May 19, 1989

In Smith , the New Mexico Supreme Court held that a New Mexico statute making medical peer review records immune from discovery did not create an evidentiary privilege and, therefore, did not conflict with the court’s rules … The statute clearly and unambiguously provides that such transcripts are inadmissible at any proceeding, except those specifically set forth in K.S.A. 1988 Supp. 44-714.

Bresciani v. Haragan

1998 Colo. J. C.A.R. 5390 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Oct 15, 1998

Hence, the immunity of an employee with respect to an action based upon willful and wanton conduct does not implicate any question of "sovereign immunity"; it involves the employee's "qualified immunity" only. … Noting that §XX-XX-XXX(2)(a) provides that a public employee "shall be immune from liability " (emphasis supplied), and not immunity from suit, it concluded that the qualified immunity granted to an employee under the GIA

Williams v. Brown & Root, Inc.

947 S.W.2d 673 · Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana) · Jun 6, 1997

Williams contends that the statute does not contemplate granting immunity to more than one general contractor. Therefore, Williams argues that because Eastman is immune, Brown & Root cannot be immune. Tex.Rev.Civ. Stat. … Similarly, in the instant case, Brown & Root qualifies as a general contractor because it procured Tracer’s services. Therefore, Brown & Root can avail itself of the protections of Article 8308-3.05(e).

Lyons v. Walsh & Sons Trucking Co., Ltd.

183 Or. App. 76 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 31, 2002

Plaintiffs reasoned as follows: (1) Under ORS 656.018(1), which establishes workers’ compensation exclusivity, Rector and the State of Oregon were immune from civil liability. (2) ORS 18.470 precludes “comparison of fault … ” with immune persons unless the injury is the “sole and exclusive fault” of the immune person.

Mulligan v. Rioux

38 Conn. App. 546 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Jul 25, 1995

The trial court concluded that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity, set aside the verdict of the jury, and rendered judgment for the defendants on all counts of the plaintiff’s complaint. … Our Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the trial court, finding that the trial court applied the incorrect standard of qualified immunity to the plaintiff’s common law claims and had improperly substituted its judgment

Musulin v. University of Michigan Board of Regents

214 Mich. App. 277 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 14, 1995

kinds of public operations that should not qualify for immunity, and that a government agency that owns or operates a hospital will be treated like its private sector counterparts — including being subject to liability for … We do not retain jurisdiction._ 1 We are not here concerned with plaintiffs’ ability to establish *279 defendant’s liability.

Robinson v. V. D.

Connecticut Appellate Court · Nov 26, 2024

Other immunities and privileges, however, such as qualified quasi- judicial immunity and governmental immunity, have been held not to impli- cate a court’s subject matter jurisdiction and, thus, more appropriately … immunity.’’ The court concluded that the ‘‘better result is the protection of absolute immunity.’’ Id.

Connolly v. Stone

1 La.App. 5 Cir. 929 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 15, 2002

The court in Fama addressed the issue of qualified immunity of communications made by employers about an employee, and held that the protection afforded an employer by the defense of qualified privilege may be raised in a … Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, defines the term “testify” to mean, “to make a solemn declaration, under oath or affirmation, in a judicial inquiry, for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact.”

Bates Associates, LLC v. 132 Associates, LLC

290 Mich. App. 52 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 14, 2010

Further, in response to the tribe’s argument that the form contract designed for private parties without immunity could not have established a valid waiver of its tribal immunity, the Court determined that the contract was … The nonmoving party must present more than mere allegations to establish a genuine issue of material fact for resolution at trial. Id. at 31 .

Sanchez v. CANEZARO

11 So. 3d 1246 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 19, 2009

The evidence clearly shows that Chief Gueho neither witnessed Boyd Sanchez operating the bike on the day of the accident nor did he even know that Boyd was on a bicycle that day. … Moreover, the evidence in the record supports a finding that Chief Gueho and the Village of Fordoche qualify for the statutory immunity afforded by La. R.S. 9:2798.1. Mr.

Kempster v. Child Protective Services

130 A.D.2d 623 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 18, 1987

The reporting requirements which trigger the qualified immunity provision contained in Social Services Law § 419 are not predicated upon actual or conclusive proof of abuse or maltreatment. … With reference to the facts before us, we conclude that the medical data and other available information clearly indicated that further investigation of possible maltreatment was warranted in view of the fact that the infant

Mulford v. Mangano

35 Mass. App. Ct. 800 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Jan 21, 1994

“Another established principle is that the employee, in order to be entitled to compensation, need not necessarily be engaged in the actual performance of work at the moment of injury. … L. c. 152, § 1(7A), as amended through St. 1985, c. 572, § 11. 1 If Mangano’s sole reason for being at the restaurant were to watch the Celtics game with fellow employees, he would not qualify for coemployee immunity.

Hill v. StubHub, Inc.

219 N.C. App. 227 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 6, 2012

“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). … Given that the record clearly establishes that Defendant operates an “interactive computer service” and that Plaintiffs claim is predicated on the theory that Defendant should be held responsible for content, in the form

Ezerski v. Mendenhall

188 Ohio App. 3d 126 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 30, 2010

The Ezerskis also contend that Vandalia cannot re-establish its immunity using a statutory defense. … Still, although one of these circumstances exists, the political subdivision can re-establish its immunity using the defenses in R.C. 2744.03.

N.M. State Land Off. v. Siddens & Dodson, LLP

New Mexico Court of Appeals · Jun 12, 2025

“A movant establishes a prima facie case 15 when the motion is supported by such evidence as is sufficient in law to raise a 16 presumption of fact or establish the fact in question unless rebutted.” Id. … The State of New Mexico has had prior knowledge of this 2 potential and did nothing about it. 3 Siddens agreed as well with the SLO’s description of the tort claim notice as having 4 communicated a “clearly stated

Amburgey v. Sauder

238 Mich. App. 228 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 25, 2000

By providing that a class of persons is not bound or obligated with regard to an injury and by expressly disallowing claims under enumerated circumstances, the Legislature intended to grant immunity to qualifying defendants … The signs shall be placed in a clearly visible location in close proximity to the equine activity.