Case law

JOSEPH CASTELLANO, M. D. v. DAVID HALPERN, M. D. AND WEST FLORIDA-MHT, LLC D/ B/ A HCA FLORIDA SOUTH TAMPA HOSPITAL

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 29, 2023

Next, we must determine whether Castellano has shown that the trial court departed from clearly established law. … A departure from clearly established law can be shown by the misapplication of the plain language in a statute. Gonzalez, 15 So. 3d at 39.

City of Canyon, Texas and Lois Rice v. Kevin Fehr and Brian Goss

Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo) · Dec 8, 2003

The first and second concern the doctrines of sovereign immunity and standing, respectively. … Issue One — Sovereign Immunity Canyon initially argues that the doctrine of sovereign immunity barred the suit. We disagree and overrule the point.

Monica Sebble on Behalf of the Estate of Vivian Lee Brown (D) v. St. Luke's 2, LLC D/B/A St. Luke Living Center; Wound Care Associates, LLC; And Bridgepoint Healthcare La, LLC D/B/A Bridgepoint Continuing Care Hospital

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 6, 2023

R.S. 29:771 reflects that the legislators fully intended this to be an immunity statute.25 La R.S. 29:771(B)(1) clearly delineates 25 At the time of the alleged malpractice, La R.S. 29:771 provided, in pertinent part: … Rather, Bridgepoint may assert the qualified immunity found in La.

Pamela Stanley v. Dekalb County

Court of Appeals of Georgia · Oct 8, 2021

To state a claim under Title II of the ADA, a plaintiff must establish that: (1) she is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) she was either excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of the services … immunity, also known as qualified immunity, offers public officers and employees limited protection from suit in their personal capacity”) (citation and punctuation omitted).

State v. Rendon

832 So. 2d 141 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 30, 2002

Following Garrett , various courts of appeal have held that sovereign immunity also bars actions against states under Title II, which provides that "no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability … That predicate ... has not been established." Id. at 376 , 121 S.Ct. 955 .

A.F., by and through her next friend L.F. v. Hazelwood School District, Brenda Rone and Elizabeth Brands

491 S.W.3d 628 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 22, 2016

App. 3 A.F. misquotes her own petition in the brief when she refers to this allegation as merely “requiring the rules be enforced,” without including the qualifying phrase “fairly, firmly and consistently.” … Moreover, paying for faculty to earn advanced degrees also clearly benefits this overall governmental function, and thus cannot be deemed a proprietary matter. 8

Crow v. Rockett Special Utility District

17 S.W.3d 320 · Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco) · May 24, 2000

SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY Crow claims in his third issue that the court erred in granting summary judgment because “Rockett waived any immunity it would be entitled to by contracting with Crow, a private citizen.” … Thus, Rockett has not contractually waived its immunity from liability. 3 Cf. Federal Sign, 951 S.W.2d at 405-06 (immunity from liability waived by contract). Accordingly, we overrule Crow’s third issue.

City of Lubbock v. Land

33 S.W.3d 357 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 23, 2000

Land, however, contends that Article 42.20 does not apply to the City, but only to the entity establishing the program. Thus, in construing Article 42.20, our objective is to give effect to the Legislature’s intent. … The City qualifies as a political subdivision. See Tex.Gov’t.Code Annotated § 418.004(6) (Vernon 1998). Unfortunately, the statute does not define the term official capacity.

Gibson v. Methodist Hospital

822 S.W.2d 95 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Oct 17, 1991

A determination about whether a patient qualifies for autologous blood transfusions is a medical decision. … Texas law clearly provides that Methodist cannot be held liable on the issues of strict liability and implied warranty.

City of Midlothian v. Black

271 S.W.3d 791 · Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco) · Nov 5, 2008

In the absence of a clear and unambiguous waiver of immunity we must, therefore, review the Supreme Court’s established guidelines: (1) the statute in question must waive immunity “beyond doubt”; (2) ambiguities are generally … According to Black, by incorporating the Government Code’s definition of person into section 11.086(a), the Legislature clearly and unambiguously meant to waive Midlothian’s immunity from suit.

Neuburger v. State ex rel. State Department of Highways

162 So. 2d 183 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 2, 1964

Whether the person so authorized qualifies as “tutor” or “administrator” should make no difference. … A motorist, travelling by night, is not required to guard against striking an unexpected or unusual obstruction *186 which he could not anticipate would be encountered on the highway, unless the same were clearly marked,

Harrison v. Veolia Water Indianapolis, LLC

929 N.E.2d 247 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 2010

Although the issue here is not, strictly speaking, one of sovereign immunity, we believe it is necessary to review the history of sovereign immunity in Indiana and the adoption of ITCA. 3 Sovereign immunity originated in … Despite the difficulty of defining what constituted a "proprietary function" for which a municipality could be held liable if it had been performed negligently, there were numerous cases clearly establishing that a municipality's

Board of Education v. Hueber

90 A.D.2d 685 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 29, 1982

Inasmuch as his opinion was properly grounded on the facts in evidence and based upon his professional expertise in the field, this testimony with other evidence in the case was enough to establish a prima facie case for … noting that expert opinion evidence was required in an action of this type (see 530 East 89 Corp. v Unger, 54 AD2d 848 , affd 43 NY2d 776 ), urge that the evidence was not legally sufficient because the witness subsequently qualified

Renzi v. Morrison

249 Ill. App. 3d 5 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 24, 1993

As a further safeguard, no record or communication is relevant “unless the party seeking disclosure of the communication clearly establishes in the trial court a compelling need for its production.” … The statute clearly indicates the legislature intended to modify absolute common law witness immunity in order to provide a remedy of damages against persons who violate the act.

Smith v. City of Tucson

153 Ariz. 372 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Feb 19, 1987

The restriction was clearly posted and appellant saw the signs. The appellant was not a neighborhood resident, nor did he qualify for a visitor parking permit. … Notwithstanding appellant’s strenuous argument that a more stringent level of review should be utilized, our supreme court has clearly answered this question, and we will not consider the issue further.

Hall v. King

254 So. 2d 223 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 11, 1971

Notwithstanding the establishment of his residency in Georgia, petitioner contends that he has established what he terms to be a secondary residence in Florida due to his many and close contacts with the State. … This point is clearly made in footnote 21 of the decision found at 394 U.S. 638 , 89 S.Ct. at 1333 as follows: “21.

City of Dallas v. East Village Association

480 S.W.3d 37 · Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · Oct 7, 2015

We will therefore determine whether the Association’s pleadings establish a waiver of governmental immunity. No factual inquiry by the trial court is required or warranted. … And even if the City established that the notice given was sufficient as a matter of law, which it has not, such a showing would not affect the waiver of governmental immunity under the UDJA.

State v. Fernandez

141 So. 3d 1211 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 21, 2014

“While some pretrial evidentiary rulings may qualify for certiorari, it must be remembered that the extraordinary writ is reserved for those situations where ‘there has been a violation of a clearly established principle … However, the defendants charged in the related cases still qualify as witnesses.

International Paper Co. v. Broadhead

662 So. 2d 277 · Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · Jan 6, 1995

Hammermill Penn invested $107 million in Dallas County in order to qualify for the credit. … The objective of the statute would clearly be thwarted if IPCO is denied the right of its predecessor's statutory credit.

Dixon v. Superior Court

30 Cal. App. 4th 733 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 30, 1994

[ft] SRS is fully qualified to compete with other consultants in submitting proposals, and they should be expected to do so. … Therefore, SRS could not, as a matter of law, have established a probability of prevailing at trial because~even if it proved Dixon acted with malice, his statements are still entitled to absolute immunity. (Cf. Long v.