Case law

Ridley v. City of Detroit

231 Mich. App. 381 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 1998

“It is a well-established principle of statutory construction that the Legislature is presumed to act with knowledge of this Court’s statutory interpretations.” … A trial court’s findings of fact may not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. MCR 2.613(C); Andrews v Pentwater Twp, 222 Mich App 491, 493 ; 563 NW2d 713 (1997).

McComb v. Tamlyn

173 Or. App. 6 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 14, 2001

On the other hand, a failure to recognize the need for that equipment under established criteria would not be immune. Id. at 14-15 . The court’s ruling in Stevenson illustrates the distinction. … As the Manual states, in a portion that plaintiffs expert quoted on cross-examination, “qualified engineers are needed to exercise engineering judgment inherent in the selection of traffic control devices.”

Keyes v. Santa Clara Valley Water District

128 Cal. App. 3d 882 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 17, 1982

831.8 providing for qualified governmental immunity relating to artificial conditions of reservoirs and canals. … On the other hand, section 831.8 sets forth a qualified governmental immunity for artificial conditions arising from man-made water impoundment and distribution improvements and facilities, such as reservoirs, canals, conduits

Wilson v. Marino

164 Ohio App. 3d 662 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 9, 2005

that Plaintiff-Appellant’s expert witness was qualified to testify as to the standard of care? … On redirect, Diment testified, “[T]here is a direct relationship between [appellant’s] work related injury, her subsequent chiropractic treatment, and her subsequent surgical treatment.” {¶ 57} The record clearly shows that

Hill v. Lamberth

73 S.W.3d 131 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Oct 2, 2001

The record in this case establishes that Principal Bell was the person charged with making decisions regarding security measures for football games under the TSSAA Bylaws. … This Court has recognized that: School administrators are the only persons aware of the particular needs of the school ... and are therefore in the unique position of being the only persons qualified to make informed decisions

Darrell Klein v. WI Dept of Revenue

394 Wis. 2d 66 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · Aug 11, 2020

The summary judgment methodology is well established. See Tews v. NHI, LLC, 2010 WI 137, ¶4, 330 Wis. 2d 389, 793 N.W.2d 860. … . § 1983 (2018), did not abrogate the state’s sovereign immunity. That statute was not intended to “disregard the well-established immunity of a State from being sued without its consent.” Will v.

Curadev Pharma PVT. LTD. and Curadev Pharma Limited v. the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dr. Xiaochen Bai, and Dr. Xuewu Zhang

Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District · Feb 24, 2025

Curadev has not established that the Legislature clearly and unambiguously waived sovereign immunity for claims of trade secret misappropriation. ....................................... … Curadev has not established that the Legislature clearly and unambiguously waived sovereign immunity for claims of trade secret misappropriation.

Humana Insurance Company v. Dolores Mueller

Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · Apr 29, 2015

Section 2259.002 of the Government Code expressly provides that the “establishment and maintenance of a self- insurance program by a governmental unit is not a waiver of immunity.” TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. … As previously noted, Chapter 271 waives sovereign immunity from suit for certain breach of contract claims against qualifying local governmental entities. See TEX. LOC.

Aspire Power Ventures, LP v. Public Utility Commission of Texas, Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Thomas Gleeson, Lori Cobos, Jimmy Glotfelty, Kathleen Jackson, and Courtney Hjaltman

Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District · Mar 26, 2026

This appeal is part of Aspire’s efforts to establish so. … Nueces Cnty., 579 S.W.3d 354, 360 (Tex. 2019) (governmental immunity clearly waived when statutory provisions waive immunity without doubt). 29 See PUC Brief on the Merits, PUC v.

Wechsler v. Wayne County Road Commission

215 Mich. App. 579 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 26, 1996

immunity below. … The defendant clearly could have done much more to focus attention on the issue of threshold liability.

Kimps v. Hill

187 Wis. 2d 508 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · Sep 15, 1994

App. 1985), some types of exercises of judgment or discretion are professional, not governmental, and are exceptions to the rule of qualified immunity. But in Stann v. … Kursevski's job description required him to establish and administer the risk management program.

Wooley v. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders

218 N.J. Super. 56 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 4, 1987

The county moved for summary judgment on the ground of the immunity granted under N.J.S.A. 59:4-6. … In ruling in favor of the county, the motion judge concluded that the design or plan immunity was applicable and further that plaintiffs had failed to establish that defendant's conduct with reference to the maintenance of

HICKMAN BY WOMBLE v. Fuqua

108 N.C. App. 80 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 17, 1992

However, recent case law clearly establishes that if immunity is raised as a grounds for the summary judgment motion, a substantial right is affected and the denial is immediately appealable. Herndon v. … City of Winston-Salem, 332 N.C. 319 , 420 S.E.2d 432 (1992), the Court held that the City of Winston-Salem did not waive its immunity from civil tort liability when it established RAMCO.

Nguyen v. Lam

2017 IL App (1st) 161272 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 5, 2018

Lam admitted that he never inspected the catch basin or lid after 1992 and a videotape and photographs clearly showed the rusted condition of the catch basin lid and the deteriorated concrete around the … The defendant municipality asserted it was immune from liability under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/3-102(a) (West 2010)) because it did

Joseph Weixeldorfer vs. City of Kansas City, Missouri, et al.

Missouri Court of Appeals · Jun 17, 2025

Weixeldorfer fails to establish that he suffered any prejudice by the court's denial of his motion to amend. … sovereign immunity to City.

Closson v. State

784 P.2d 661 · Court of Appeals of Alaska · Dec 22, 1989

In keeping with general principles governing appellate review of contract claims, a trial court’s findings on the terms and scope of an immunity agreement and on the issue of breach must be upheld unless clearly erroneous … Accordingly, the court was not clearly erroneous in finding that Closson’s breach of the immunity agreement was not excused.

John Crouch v. State of Indiana, Britni Saunders

Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 30, 2020

We cannot say that this statute clearly evinces or unequivocally expresses the legislature’s intention to waive the State’s sovereign immunity under these circumstances. … evince” or “unequivocally express” its intention to waive State immunity for whistleblower claims). 4 [22] Even assuming the legislature expressed such an intent or that the State or Saunders qualifies

Purdum v. Purdum

48 Kan. App. 2d 938 · Court of Appeals of Kansas · May 17, 2013

The court dismissed the claim against the wife because of common-law spousal immunity. … Moreover, if Harcsar relies on the defense of qualified privilege, she has the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of qualified privilege.

Kelley v. State

133 A.D.3d 1337 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 20, 2015

Defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the claim based on its affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … The Court of Claims granted the motion in part, determining that defendant was entitled to qualified immunity insofar as claimants alleged that defendant was negligent in its decision-making process.

Leroy Wilson v. Harris County Water Control & Improvement District 21 and Mike Buckner

Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Mar 28, 2006

Immunity A. Sovereign Immunity In his first two issues, Wilson contends the Water District and Buckner failed to establish as a matter of law that Buckner was performing a discretionary action in good faith. … Ordinarily, to obtain summary judgment on the basis of official immunity, the movant must conclusively establish that the employee in question was: (1) performing discretionary duties; (2) that were within the scope of the