Case law

Stevens v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation

89 Pa. Commw. 309 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 17, 1985

The requirements of the statute are clearly written and create a very narrow exception to the defense of sovereign immunity for damages caused by potholes. … The statute clearly requires the “claimant to recover must establish” that the applicable Commonwealth agency, here PennDOT, had actual written notice of the dangerous condition with sufficient time in which to effect repairs

Department of Social & Health Services v. Willis

126 Wash. App. 786 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 11, 2005

While that is true, and while termination of parental rights is a consequence of sufficient gravity to qualify as compulsion, 12 the penalty cases have generally required a showing that a penalty would follow directly, and … In cases where compulsion is present, prior access to counsel would clearly be inadequate.

VALENZONA v. Carlisle

187 P.3d 593 · Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · Feb 5, 2008

Therefore, "qualified immunity bars claims against state officials in their individual capacities if their conduct did not violate clearly established federal statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … right that has been allegedly violated, (2) whether that right was so clearly established as to alert a reasonable official to its parameters, and (3) whether a reasonable official could have believed his or her conduct

Washburne v. Town of Madison

175 Conn. App. 613 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Aug 15, 2017

‘‘This language clearly and expressly abrogates the tra- ditional common-law doctrine in this state that munici- palities are immune from suit for torts committed by their employees and agents.’’ Spears v. … The words ‘‘Safety Guidelines’’ are also clearly printed on top of the chart.

Agnes Scott College v. Amanda Hartley

Court of Appeals of Georgia · Mar 29, 2013

Hartley’s complaint alleges that a “reasonable investigation” would have established that Hartley was not at the student’s dorm at the time of the alleged assault. … The rationale behind the statutory doctrine of qualified immunity is “to preserve the public employee’s independence of action without fear of lawsuits and to prevent a review of his or her judgment in hindsight.”

Guenther v. Springfield Twp. Trustees

2012 Ohio 203 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 20, 2012

Political-Subdivision Immunity A. … Rather, the crux of the case appears to have been that the court found questions of material fact about whether the Township could re-establish immunity by demonstrating that the actions it took were a matter of judgment

Massachusetts Department of Correction v. Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination and Pamela Scanlan

Massachusetts Superior Court · Jan 15, 2019

A moving party bears a heavy burden of establishing that an agency's decision is invalid. See Merisme v. Board of Appeals on Motor Vehicle Policies and Bonds, 27 Mass. App. Ct. 470, 474 (1989); Mass. … Applying these requirements, the motion judge correctly concluded that the MCAD decision should be given preclusive effect. -4- [T]he MCAD qualifies as a "court of competent jurisdiction" because it is "a tribunal recognized

Croton v. Gillis

104 Mich. App. 104 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 3, 1981

Defendant, if he had any privilege to comment as he did, had merely a qualified privilege. See New York Times Co v Sullivan, 376 US 254 ; 84 S Ct 710 ; 11 L Ed 2d 686 (1964), and the discussion infra. … Plaintiffs allegations of libel and malice are clearly sufficient to avoid summary judgment based on governmental immunity.

People v. Rubio

250 Cal. Rptr. 3d 31 · California Court of Appeal, 5th District · Jul 18, 2019

That is, officials are entitled to qualified immunity unless they have "violated a 'clearly established' right," which means that in an appropriate case a court can enter a defense judgment on qualified immunity grounds " … Questions of qualified immunity aside, Ryburn is also factually distinguishable.

Langer v. Xenias

134 A.D.3d 906 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 16, 2015

However, it is accorded a qualified immunity from liability arising out of a highway safety planning decision (see Friedman v State of New York, 67 NY2d at 283 ; Alexander v Eldred, 63 NY2d 460, 465-466 [1984]; Weiss v Fote … Here, the City failed to establish, prima facie, its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on its defense of qualified immunity (see Ernest v Red Cr. Cent.

Bandy v. International Paper Co.

690 So. 2d 902 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 26, 1997

of the immune system. … The plaintiff agrees that there are qualified physicians within recognized medical specialities, who would testify that a person's immune system is not lowered by such exposures, and that such exposures do not make a person

Correro v. Caldwell

166 So. 3d 442 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 3, 2015

by statute or otherwise, including but not limited to immunity as provided in R.S. 23:1032, or that the other person’s identity is not known or reasonably ascertainable. … On its face, the claim against the employer was clearly prescribed.

in the Interest of A.J.E., a Child

372 S.W.3d 696 · Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland) · May 10, 2012

“A trial court abuses its discretion when it acts arbitrarily or unreasonably, or when it clearly fails to correctly analyze or apply the law.” Id. … The letter establishes that immunization of the child is not medically contraindicated and that it complies with the recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Kovac v. Crooked River Ranch Club & Maintenance Ass'n

186 Or. App. 545 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 19, 2003

Those “CC&Rs” establish a homeowner association called the Crooked River Ranch Club and Maintenance Association (defendant). … We need not reach plaintiffs contentions that an agreement to delegate governmental standard-setting authority to a private entity violates Oregon’s antitrust statute and does not qualify for Noerr-Pennington immunity.

DeFelice v. Cummings

Superior Court of Delaware · Aug 16, 2016

Qualified Immunily Defendants invoke the doctrine of qualified immunity that protects government officials and employees "from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Therefore, this Court need not address whether the violation, if one had occurred, was of a "clearly established" right.49 Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity and Plaintiff’ s § 1983 claims are barred and otherwise

Domingue v. Stanley

784 So. 2d 844 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 2, 2001

Brian Paul Domingue proceeded down a small hill into a level area and then proceeded up a hill on what he believed to be a well established motorcycle or ATV trail. … Finding that the DOTD was entitled to immunity, we stated: Clearly, this accident took place in a rural setting. Because of this site's popularity, we believe it warrants being termed a recreational area.

Parker County v. Weatherford Independent School District

775 S.W.2d 881 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Aug 3, 1989

This was done in response to election petitions presented to the county clerk by qualified voters. … Furthermore, the implied limitation on the assessing and collection functions of the taxing units is clearly expressed in the provisions of section 6.26 which allows the electorate to designate the agency most suitable for

State Ex Rel. King v. Mahoning County Board of Elections

126 Ohio App. 3d 118 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 16, 1998

and good faith immunity. … Given the pending primary election to be held on May 5, 1998, this court established an expedited schedule for filing stipulations and respective motions for summary judgment. This matter now comes on for decision.

Byrne v. Boys Baseball League

236 N.J. Super. 185 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 4, 1989

intention was to mandate the establishment of a program as a quid pro quo, as it were, for the immunity, thus granting it only to those volunteers who had actually participated in such a program. … The 1988 version does more than define, qualify, and standardize the prescribed safety program.

Giske v. State

191 A.D.2d 675 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 29, 1993

The testimony presented at trial established that the State had been aware, at least since 1982, that similar accidents had occurred at the site of the decedent’s accident. … Although the State is accorded a qualified immunity from liability arising out of highway planning decisions, the doctrine of qualified immunity does not shield the State from liability where, as here, it has failed to demonstrate