Case law

Dennis v. City and County of Denver

419 P.3d 997 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Sep 22, 2016

The CGIA establishes governmental immunity from suit in tort actions, but it waives immunity under specific circumstances, including, as relevant here, when there 6  exists “[ … Burden of Proof in Establishing Immunity Waiver ¶ 19 Heyboer raises two issues on appeal.

Finch v. Carroll Cnty. Ark.

445 S.W.3d 535 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 22, 2014

Appellees answered the amended complaint and pled defenses of qualified immunity, punitive-damages immunity, sovereign immunity, justification, mootness, set-off, comparative fault, failure to mitigate, assumption of risk … Once a moving party establishes a prima facie entitlement to the summary judgment by affidavits, depositions, or other supporting documents, the opposing party must meet proof with proof and demonstrate the existence of

John Lane-El v. Michael Spears, in his official capacity of Chief of Police, and the Indianapolis Police Department

13 N.E.3d 859 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 9, 2014

In the APRA, the Legislature established the procedure for disputing a denial of access to public records. … The trial court concluded that Chief Spears was immune from suit under the ITCA, which is codified at INDIANA CODE §§ 34-13-3-0.1–34-13-3-25 (2006) and immunizes public employees against certain tort claims.

Winters v. City of Jersey City

120 N.J. Super. 129 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 28, 1972

Again, there was no mention of the specific "limited" immunity statute here under consideration. Moreover, the liability established by the Act is without limitation as to amount. … When the Legislature has intended that a governmental body should be immune, it has clearly and expressly said so. *147 Cf.

Miskinis v. Chester Township Park District

112 Ohio App. 3d 466 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 10, 1996

R.C. 2744.03(A) delineates the scope of qualified statutory immunity afforded to a political subdivision and provides that: “(3) The political subdivision is immune from liability if the action or failure to act by the employee … Accordingly, appellees were entitled to qualified statutory immunity under R.C. 2744.03 and to judgment as a matter of law. Further, we note that appellant failed to properly plead any of the tort claims.

Owens v. Schoenberger

681 N.E.2d 760 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 25, 1997

is clearly a question of fact.” … Therefore, we do not find it to be an erroneous decision by the trial court that as a matter of law the letter was not protected by qualified privilege and Angus could not assert the defense of qualified immunity.

Limjoco v. Schenck

169 Wis. 2d 703 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · Jun 10, 1992

The Schencks respond that, in order to qualify as a protected peer review program, sec. 146.37, Stats., requires only that the program be organized and operated for the purpose of improving the quality of health care. … Similarly, there is no link established between Limjoco's departure and any economic gain enjoyed by the Schencks after that departure.

Titus Regional Medical Center and Steve Jacobson, Individually v. Joseph T. Tretta, D.O.

Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana) · Nov 21, 2005

to official immunity if he is otherwise qualified. … As the medical diagnosis hearsay exception is well established as a firmly rooted exception to the hearsay rule, admission of this evidence does not violate the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States

Krol v. CF & I Steel

307 P.3d 1116 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Mar 14, 2013

"To be afforded this immunity, an employer must be a 'statutory employer as contemplated by the [Act]." Id. at 63 ; see Doyle v. … And, of course, reference to that policy begs the question whether an entity qualifies as an employer entitled to immunity, a matter dependent on an entity's ability to show that the relevant facts bring the case within statutorily

Dallas County Medical Society v. Ubiñas-Brache

68 S.W.3d 31 · Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · Oct 18, 2001

Ubiñas responds that appellants did not plead section 5.06(0, the proceeding did not qualify as a medical peer review action, section 5.06(m) does not preclude an action for injunctive relief, and the exercise of immunity … Thus, the DCMS and the TMA established the action as a medical peer review determination covered by the Act. Immunity from Injunction The Act provides for two types of immunity.

Titus Regional Medical Center v. Glenna Virginia Roach

Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana) · Jun 24, 2011

Likewise, whether undisputed evidence of jurisdictional facts establishes a trial court’s jurisdiction is also a question of law. Miranda , 133 S.W.3d at 225–26. … The rails were part of the bed; failing to properly employ the bed qualifies as the hospital’s use of its tangible property.

L. Marshall & P. Fuller v. SEPTA ~ Appeal of: New Jersey Transit & New Jersey Transit Corp.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 4, 2023

Plaintiffs summarily conclude that because a NJ Transit bus accident “is an exception to state sovereign immunity,” “there is clearly no” immunity here. Id. at - . … Id.25 Although the Scanlon Court did not address the Tort Act, New York public entity may negate liability by establishing immunity.

Johnson v. Dziak

2026 Ohio 1603 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 4, 2026

R.C. 2744.03(A)(6) “prescribes immunities that an employee of a political subdivision may assert to establish nonliability in a civil action for damages allegedly caused by an act or omission in connection with a governmental … To that end, I would conclude the Officers met their initial burden on summary judgment of setting forth evidence establishing they qualified for general immunity. See Hall v.

Krueger v. Lewis

342 Ill. App. 3d 467 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 24, 2003

A complaint for defamation must set forth the words alleged to be defamatory “clearly and with particularity.” Lykowski v. Bergman, 299 Ill. App. 3d 157, 163 , 700 N.E.2d 1064, 1069 (1998). … Defendant Zakos argued that his statement was privileged, but it is not apparent whether he sought the protection of an absolute or qualified privilege.

the United Healthcare Choice Plus Plan for City of Austin Employees and the City of Austin v. Charles Lesniak

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 3, 2015

Appellee concedes the City of Austin is a qualifying governmental entity with immunity [Appellee’s Brief, p. 7], and does not dispute that the Plan, which is a self-funded benefit plan established by the City of Austin, … If Appellee’s argument regarding Section 271.152 was accepted, every governmental entity would waive immunity when it established a self-funded plan, and Section 2259.002 would be rendered a nullity.

Cochran v. Herzog Engraving Co.

155 Cal. App. 3d 405 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 11, 1984

This legislative statement clearly underscores the important reasons of public policy which support the broad scope of this immunity. (Clayton v. City of Sunnyvale, supra, 62 Cal.App.3d at pp. 670-671.) … City of Modesto (1966) 64 Cal.2d 229 [ 29 Cal.Rptr. 377 , 411 P.2d 105 ], that these statutes establish governmental immunity under the facts of this case.

Egan v. Hamline United Methodist Church

679 N.W.2d 350 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Apr 13, 2004

Clearly, Egan had to be familiar with the corpus of church music and theology to select the proper music for such services. … Avoiding such a conflict does more to prevent an entanglement problem than it establishes any preferred position for religious organizations or creates an establishment problem.

Ervin Cable Construction, LLC v. Lay

461 S.W.3d 422 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Apr 3, 2015

Moreover, a written agreement between Ervin Cable and Advanced Cable was not necessarily required since the facts clearly establish the existence of their contractor/subcontractor arrangement, as a practical matter. … This assertion is clearly refuted by the record.

Twilligear v. Carrell

148 S.W.3d 502 · Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Aug 26, 2004

immunity, 6 which the trial court denied. … Carrell also cites Bemardoni and Prichard as establishing that a judge’s liability under section 671 exceeds the amount of his bond. See Bernardoni v. Holman, 177 S.W.2d 321, 322 (Tex.Civ.App.

Colling v. Franklin County Children Services

89 Ohio App. 3d 245 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 1993

On this score, R.C. 2744.02(B)(5) states that an exception to immunity exists where “liability is expressly imposed upon the political subdivision by a section of the Revised Code. ‡ ‡ ‡ M To establish such liability, plaintiffs … Plaintiffs did not establish any record to the contrary.