Case law

Steward v. Magnolia

134 N.J. Super. 312 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 28, 1975

[At 241] Thus, despite the substantial erosion of interspousal immunity, there are clearly some areas in which the doctrine is still viable. Paraphrasing what was said in Pearce v. N.J. Highway Authority, 122 N.J. … It clearly does not encompass any immunity available to the employee for a reason other than his public employment, such as an interfamilial relationship.

Maguire Oil Co. v. City of Houston

69 S.W.3d 350 · Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana) · Mar 6, 2002

A city is immune from liability for its governmental actions unless that immunity is waived. City of LaPorte v. Barfield, 898 S.W.2d 288, 291 (Tex.1995). … The City contends Rosenthal is not a common-law exception to sovereign immunity because Rosenthal did not involve sovereign immunity.

Lyons v. TERREBONNE PARISH CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT

2010 La.App. 1 Cir. 2258 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 10, 2011

clearly on the face of the pleadings. … Because the affirmative defense, which establishes the State’s immunity, appears clearly on the face of the petition, the trial court properly sustained the State’s exception raising the objection of no cause of action and

State v. Lueck

212 S.W.3d 630 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Oct 17, 2006

Sovereign immunity is waived only when the legislature has clearly and unambiguously expressed that intent. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 311.034 (West Supp.2005); Texas Dep’t of Transp. v. … (‘We believe the first sentence of section 554.0035 ... clearly waive[s] immunity from suit, while the second sentence of section 554.0035, by its terms, waives immunity from liability.”) (emphasis in original).

Buckner v. Carlton

623 S.W.2d 102 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Jul 30, 1981

The primary issue then is whether the appellees can claim immunity from suit under either the common law rule of executive immunity or T.C.A. § 49-1416(9). *104 The common law rule recognized a qualified immunity from suit … In our opinion the immunity is absolute. A statutory grant of qualified immunity would be unnecessary since school officials already enjoy such immunity at common law.

McDowell v. City of Detroit

264 Mich. App. 337 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 6, 2005

The trial court specifically delineated those claims that it found to *344 involve governmental immunity and identified only plaintiffs tort claims. Clearly, the tort claims are within our scope of review. … The assertion of revenues is not the establishment of a profit.

Erin Kosch v. Traverse City Area Public Schools

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 22, 2024

According to plaintiff, Berck violated a “clearly established right” and thus is not entitled to qualified immunity. … Plaintiff refers to federal law regarding qualified immunity, while defendants refer to state law regarding gross negligence under MCL 691.1407. Both sides are incorrect.

Gaitan v. State

905 S.W.2d 703 · Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Nov 15, 1995

Furthermore, many county and district attorneys have limited authority to administer an oath in their official capacity unless they qualify as a notary public and administer the oath in that capacity. Greer v. … A trial court clearly abuses its discretion when its decision is so clearly wrong as to lie outside that zone within which reasonable persons might disagree. Montgomery v.

C.L. v. Olson

140 Wis. 2d 224 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · May 21, 1987

In view of our conclusion that the affidavit establishes a prima facie immunity defense, we limit our review of the affidavit to those parts relevant to immunity. … Neakok, 721 P.2d 1121, 1132-35 (Alaska 1986) (whether parole board is immune not decided but parole officer not immune when establishing parole plan and conditions for an individual parolee).

Smith v. Euclid

2019 Ohio 3099 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 1, 2019

Moreover, even if it had caused damage, the City established that it was immune from liability for such discretionary acts under R.C. 2744.03(A)(5). … Negligence−Nuisance Here, the parties do not dispute that the City is a political subdivision, and thus, qualifies for general immunity under R.C. 2744.02(A).

Cosentino v. Fuller

California Court of Appeal · May 28, 2015

The IGRA requires a tribe’s gaming ordinance to establish a licensing system for all “primary management officials and key employees of the gaming enterprise.” … The Court of Appeal reversed, concluding the record failed to establish the defendants qualified as tribal officials or acted within the scope of their official authority.

White v. Cleveland

2025 Ohio 739 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 6, 2025

Like the present case, Ferrante was removed to federal district court where the officers claimed qualified immunity. … Moreover, concerning Kubas’s and Santiago’s actions, the district court found that “White’s evidence is clearly sufficient to establish a genuine issue of fact.

Kamy Investments, LLC KAMY Trust Kozamesa Inc. Reram Inc. Amy J. Sadeghian of KAMY Real Property Trust Khosrow Sadeghian And Zachary Sadeghian of Kamy Real Property Trust v. Denton County Appraisal Review Board

Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) · Aug 1, 2024

In summary, they establish the following: (1) entering into a contract does not waive a governmental entity’s immunity from suit; (2) there is a statutory waiver of immunity for contracts involving goods a services—a … The court then goes on to discuss how Chapter 271 of the Local Government Code expressly waives qualifying local governmental entities’ immunity from suit for certain breach-of- contract claims but concludes that “the

Bailey v. State

147 Wash. App. 251 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 18, 2008

She points out that there is support for early dismissal review in qualified and absolute immunity cases. See, e.g., Robinson v. … City of Seattle, 119 Wn.2d 34, 65 , 830 P.2d 318 (1992) (qualified immunity granted in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 cases requires that insubstantial claims must be resolved quickly); Taggart v.

Love v. State Dep't of Educ.

240 Cal. Rptr. 3d 861 · California Court of Appeal, 5th District · Nov 20, 2018

against 10 specific diseases and "[a]ny other disease deemed appropriate by the [California Department of Public Health]," 6 or qualifies for an exemption recognized by statute. (§§ 120335, subds. … burden, are questions which the legislature must decide upon its own judgment, and in respect to which it is invested with a large discretion, which cannot be controlled by the courts, except, perhaps, when its action is clearly

Johnson v. State

721 N.E.2d 327 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 29, 1999

Specifically, Johnson argues that the evidence does not establish that he had repeated or continuing contact with the victim nor does it establish that the victim felt terrorized, frightened, intimidated, or threatened. … To qualify as fundamental error, an error must be a clear and substantial blatant violation of basic and elementary principles that renders the trial unfair to the defendant. Townsend v.

In re: B.Cd. & B.Cb.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Aug 28, 2025

As a part of a study, the court may order that the child or any parent or guardian be examined by a physician, psychiatrist, psychologist, or other professionally qualified person. … SB 3 changes existing law and establishes some new procedures with which we disagree.

City of Pharr, Texas v. Heriberto De Leon

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Dec 14, 2023

To establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination, De Leon must show “(1) he has a ‘disability[’;] (2) he is ‘qualified’ for the job; and (3) he suffered an adverse employment decision because of his disability … The Act waives immunity only for viable claims. See id.

State v. Collins

56 Kan. App. 2d 140 · Court of Appeals of Kansas · Jul 20, 2018

To overcome a defendant's self-defense immunity claim, the State merely has to establish probable cause that the defendant's use of force was not justified. … The State's burden in overcoming Collins' immunity claim was simply to establish probable cause that his use of deadly force in self-defense was not justified.

Michigan National Bank v. Michigan Livestock Exchange

165 Mich. App. 243 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 13, 1987

The exchange asserts that it qualifies as a bailee and is entitled to the immunity offered by the above section. … The circuit court found the exchange did not qualify as a bailee because the "trucker’s receipts” pursuant to which the exchange held the livestock for sale did not qualify as documents of title under the Uniform Commercial