Case law

Maunalua Bay Beach Ohana 28 v. State.

154 Haw. 144 · Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · Mar 18, 2024

(1) The claim is barred by sovereign immunity under the circumstances of this case. The State argues that sovereign immunity bars an award of attorneys fees. … A claim for money damages does not qualify for class certification under HRCP Rule 23(b)(2). Id.

Wood v. Battle Ground School Dist.

27 P.3d 1208 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 27, 2001

Regarding the cross-appeal of a summary judgment dismissal of Jennifer Wood's *1213 defamation claim, we hold that the school board president has a qualified privilege but does not have absolute immunity. … Whether establishing an abuse of a qualified privilege or proving fault when the plaintiff is a public official, a plaintiff must prove actual malice.

M. Edie v. George Junior Republic in PA

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 27, 2026

Following discovery, on November 22, 2024, Appellee filed the Motion, claiming that it qualified for immunity under the Act as a statutory employer. See R.R. at 25-128. … Where, as here, Appellee’s supervisor and other employees were in the Kitchen simultaneously with Metz’s staff every day, they clearly occupied the Kitchen.

Martelli v. RA Chambers and Associates

99 Or. App. 524 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 6, 1989

Plaintiffs essential argument is that defendant is not his employer and, therefore, does not qualify for statutory immunity. … Defendant had the burden to establish that summary judgment was appropriate because there is no issue as to a material fact and that it was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Salonen v. Barbella

65 A.D.2d 753 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 6, 1978

It was established that a large percentage of newer church members failed to stay in Tarrytown for three months, the period of time necessary to establish a valid residency for *755 voting purposes. … The clear, unambiguous language of the statute affords a qualified privilege to one invoking the challenge, and renders one immune from civil liability to the extent that he has an articulable "reason to believe” such person

Belmont v. Forest Hills Public Schools

114 Mich. App. 692 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 6, 1982

Interpreting the recent Supreme Court cases, this Court established a two-part inquiry to determine the applicability of the defective building exception. First, the injury must occur in a public place. … Applying this standard, the Court found that the weightroom where plaintiff was injured did not qualify as a defective building under the statute. Id., 822.

Riehm v. Green Springs Rural Volunteer Fire Dept.

122 N.E.3d 226 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 9, 2018

He argued that while it was clear that Lorri’s death was a tragic accident, the evidence did not establish that Knieriemen’s actions were in bad faith, wanton, or reckless to remove immunity. … Thus in the first tier analysis, GSRVFD would qualify for the immunities in R.C. 2744.02, and Knieriemen as its employee, would as well. d.

Powers v. City of Troy

28 Mich. App. 24 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 27, 1970

immunity on these materials: the good cause requirement set forth in Rule 34 and the work product doctrine of Hickman v. … The language of the Court in Covington clearly implies that, despite the July 1965 amendment, *37 “statements” are probably still covered as “writings” by our work product Rule 306.2.

Ray Ferguson Interests, Inc. v. Harris County Sports & Convention Corp.

169 S.W.3d 18 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Oct 7, 2004

HCSCC has incurred substantial damages as a direct result of [Ferguson’s] foregoing actions and inaetions[,] for which it seeks recovery from [Ferguson]. 3 “ ‘To qualify as a claim for affirmative relief, a defensive pleading … Although some counterclaims may not seek affirmative relief, 4 HCSCC’s counterclaim *24 clearly did. 5 Also as in Reata, HCSCC did not file its jurisdictional plea until after it had filed its original counterclaim — over

Locus v. Fayetteville State University

102 N.C. App. 522 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 16, 1991

The defendants filed an answer to her complaint asserting various defenses, including lack of personal jurisdiction, failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, sovereign immunity, qualified immunity and … However, Raintree is clearly distinguishable from the case at hand in that the plaintiff there was found to have waived his objection to the 10-day notice requirement under Rule 56 by fully participating in the hearing and

Iacampo v. State

267 A.D.2d 963 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 30, 1999

On this appeal, defendant contends that the evidence does not establish common-law negligence or a violation of Labor Law §§ 200 or 241 (6), that it is entitled to qualified immunity, and that the court’s allocation of liability … Defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity because its alleged negligence was not limited to a planning decision (see, Ernest v Red Cr. Cent.

City of San Antonio v. Valemas, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · Jun 13, 2012

Payne’s pass through claim, as asserted by Valemas, clearly “arises from” the contract between the City and Valemas. … As noted by supporters of the bill, because of the threat of immunity, many qualified contractors declined to bid on local government projects, considering it too risky.

Abdallah v. OCCUPATIONAL CENTER OF HUDSON CTY., INC.

351 N.J. Super. 280 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 30, 2002

Clearly, OCHC is not a religious organization. For the reasons we hereafter explain, it appears that it is also not an educational organization within the intendment of the statute. … We do not regard this function as exclusively educational in any traditional, usual or common-language sense although, clearly, by virtue of the nature of its function, it potentially qualifies as a charitable endeavor. [

Holland v. Board of County Commissioners

18 Brief Times Rptr. 523 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Mar 24, 1994

Finally, the court dismissed all claims • against the individual defendants based upon the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Moreover, we note that it was incorrect, at the pleadings stage, for the trial court to dismiss the state law claim against Maag under the doctrine of qualified immunity. Trimble v.

Yates v. Mansfield Board of Education

150 Ohio App. 3d 241 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 20, 2002

The trial court erred as a matter of law in finding that appellants’ claim did not qualify under [the] R.C. § 2744.02(B)(5) exception to immunity. {¶ 9} “II. … The trial court erred as a matter of law by finding that appellants’ claim did not qualify under [the] R.C. § 2744.02(B)(4) exception to immunity.”

Washington v. Blackmore

119 Conn. App. 218 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Feb 2, 2010

In response, the defendants filed an answer and three special defenses alleging qualified official immunity, governmental immunity and qualified governmental immunity. … We first note the well established standard of review.

Melissa K. Bond v. United Physicians Care, Inc. d/b/a Salem Family Healthcare

Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia · May 29, 2024

In addition, with respect to questions of immunity, [t]he ultimate determination of whether qualified or statutory immunity bars a civil action is one of law for the court to determine … questions of statutory or qualified immunity are ripe for summary disposition.

McNeill v. Durham County ABC Board

87 N.C. App. 50 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 1, 1987

Radtke, a neurologist who treated plaintiff, was not qualified to give an opinion as to the angle and force of the blow to plaintiffs head is likewise meritless. Dr. … likewise waive their immunity by purchasing such insurance.

Philip Alan Green and Jonathan Zackhery Wilks v. Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts and Glenn Hegar, in His Official Capacity

Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) · Nov 21, 2023

As relevant here, the applicant must demonstrate that the proposed property is “located in an area designated as a reinvestment zone,” and it plans to “make a qualified investment” and “create at least 25 qualifying new … STANDARD OF REVIEW Unless the Legislature expressly waives immunity, governmental units are immune from lawsuits. State v. Lueck, 290 S.W.3d 876, 880 (Tex. 2009).

Rivas v. City of Houston

19 S.W.3d 901 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 8, 2000

This finding was set aside by the trial court's judgment n.o.v., which granted qualified immunity as a matter of law. … In fact, the evidence established the opposite.