Case law

Mendenhall v. City of Indianapolis

717 N.E.2d 1218 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 12, 1999

This is clearly not applicable to the case before us. … However, the federal court clearly and necessarily determined in resolving Men-denhall’s civil rights claim that Goldsmith was acting as an agent of the State.

Stokes v. University of Tenn. at Martin

737 S.W.2d 545 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Jun 19, 1987

Clearly plaintiff’s suit seeking reinstatement, back-pay, employment benefits, and attorney’s fees, comes within the purview of the statute. … This statute was repealed effective January 1, 1985, by 1984 Tenn.Pub.Acts Ch. 972, which established the Tennessee Claims Commission.

Lebleu v. Southern Silica of Louisiana

554 So. 2d 852 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 1989

Our jurisprudence clearly establishes that the source of contribution is subrogation. Thompson v. Cane Garden Apt., 480 So.2d 373 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1985); Sellers v. … health providers (like the doctor in Ferguson ) who are solidarily liable with at least one qualified health care provider.

Berry v. Texas Democratic Party

449 S.W.3d 633 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 24, 2014

Standard of Review The state generally enjoys immunity from suit and liability unless immunity has been clearly and unambiguously waived by legislative enactment or constitutional provision. See Reata Constr. Corp. v. … This provision clearly and unambiguously waives immunity from suit. The critical issues in this case are whether the statute provides any prerequisites to suit and whether TDP complied with such prerequisites.

S.C. San Antonio, Inc. v. Texas Department of Human Services

891 S.W.2d 773 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 15, 1995

’s immunity from suit. … As we *778 note, however, limited review procedures have now been established by rule at 25 Tex.Ad-rain.Code §§ 29.609(g), (h) (1994). 8 .

Bunch v. Britton

802 S.E.2d 462 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 6, 2017

To establish a waiver of sovereign immunity a plaintiff must specifically allege a waiver in his complaint. … Our Supreme Court emphasized that Corum clearly established the principle that sovereign immunity could not operate to bar direct constitutional claims.

Guernsey v. City of Salinas

241 Cal. Rptr. 3d 335 · California Court of Appeal, 5th District · Dec 17, 2018

Instead, the City's instruction went on to implicitly presume *345 that the City had established that it was entitled to design immunity without that issue ever having been presented to the trial court and, critically, to … If the trial court determines that the defense has been established, the jury is instructed that the public entity is immune as a matter of law for design-related damages, but if the damage is unrelated to the design (e.g

Prakash v. Parulekar

2020 IL App (1st) 191819 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 30, 2020

The clear language of the Act establishes that it was not intended to protect those who - 11 - No. 1-19-1819 commit tortious acts and then seek refuge in the immunity … We find that defendant has failed to establish that plaintiff’s IIED claim was meritless and retaliatory.

Powers v. Groodt

43 A.D.3d 509 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 2, 2007

of immunity to TVFC. … We conclude, as did Supreme Court, that none of these allegations sufficiently establishes petitioner’s standing.

Heard v. City of Villa Rica

306 Ga. App. 291 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Oct 1, 2010

We do not believe, however, that these facts were sufficient to establish Cash acted with gross negligence and thus without immunity under the statute. … Heard does not challenge that Cash was a sports official as defined in the statute. 8 As the party seeking to establish a wavier of the statutory immunity provided by OCGA § 51-1-41, the burden was on Heard to establish the

Arndts v. Univ. of Cincinnati Dept. of Pub. Safety

2025 Ohio 5648 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 18, 2025

Id. {¶ 14} Sovereign immunity dictates a state is immune from liability absent its explicit consent. See Smith v. Ohio State Univ., 2024-Ohio-764, ¶ 12. … To qualify for the special relationship exception to the public duty immunity rule, the amended complaint needed to include facts sufficient to show the state assumed an affirmative duty to act on behalf of appellant, some

Pre-Hospital Medical Services, Inc. v. Malheur County

134 Or. App. 481 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 24, 1995

In its first assignment, plaintiff argues that the court erred in concluding that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on the claims under 42 USC sections 1983 and 1988. … Forsyth, 472 US 511, 526 , 105 S Ct 2806 , *495 86 L Ed 2d 411 (1985) (“Unless the plaintiffs allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal

Gallagher v. COM. OF PA., BUR. OF CORR.

118 Pa. Commw. 516 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 1988

A number of recent cases establish that this section is inapplicable to this case. The exceptions to the rules of immunity must be strictly construed and narrowly interpreted. Mascaro v. … Those cell bars are clearly fixtures and hence part of the real property. Appellant asks that we also view those bars as a defective “ladder”.

Pigeon v. State

Vermont Superior Court · Dec 5, 2024

Immunity In any event, the prosecutors are entitled to immunity for their decision to continue with the charges until December 2020. … , it clearly meets the standard for qualified immunity.

Beaumont Independent School District v. Shaunte Guillory

Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) · May 12, 2016

According to Guillory’s petition, “[t]hat incident clearly sparked the successive acts of retaliation against Guillory.” … To qualify for the Whistleblower Act’s waiver of governmental immunity, Guillory had to demonstrate the following elements: (1) she was a public employee; (2) she made a good faith report of a violation of law; (3) she

Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. v. Hart High-Voltage Apparatus Repair & Testing Co.

226 Cal. Rptr. 3d 631 · California Court of Appeal, 5th District · Dec 12, 2017

Specifically, "interest" is defined as follows: "Collectively, the word includes any aggregation of rights, privileges, powers, and immunities; distributively, it refers to any one right, privilege, power, or immunity." … It is intended to more clearly define 'damages' by including indirect charges." D. Analysis of Meaning 1.

Commonwealth's Attorney of Stafford County v. Rosa Serrano

Court of Appeals of Virginia · Apr 29, 2025

The Commonwealth’s Attorney has failed to meet his burden in showing that the statute was clearly and palpably unconstitutional; therefore, the circuit court did not err in finding the Act constitutional. II. … Additionally, neither party challenges the circuit court’s timing of establishing the procedure to adjudicate the claim for attorney fees. See Rule 3:25(d).

Sipp v. Buffalo Thunder, Inc.

505 P.3d 897 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Dec 8, 2021

The court dismissed the case, concluding that “Plaintiffs have not established an express abrogation or waiver of Defendants’ sovereign immunity as required to establish subject matter jurisdiction here.” … {20} In this case, Defendants’ arguments as to why Sipp does not qualify as a visitor largely consist of points we considered and rejected in Guzman.

Julian v. Mission Community Hospital

California Court of Appeal · May 23, 2017

Qualified immunity, however, “shields public officers from section 1983 actions unless the officer has violated a clearly established constitutional right” (Mendoza v. … ‘If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established,’ then the qualified immunity inquiry ends. [Citation.]

Chad Wayne Jester v. State

62 S.W.3d 851 · Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana) · Nov 28, 2001

Moreover, even if the immunity applies to the offense about which a person testifies, the grant of immunity does not always mean that the recipient of the immunity is guilty of the crime. … Corroboration need not directly link the accused to the crime or be sufficient in itself to establish guilt.