Case law

MACALUSO EX REL. MACALUSO v. Knowles

341 N.J. Super. 112 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 5, 2001

"Thus, in California, once the court concludes that there is no special relationship establishing a duty of care, the issue of statutory immunity need not be reached." Ibid. … Campbell, 294 N.J.Super. 18, 25 , 682 A. 2d 272 (Law Div.1996), is clearly erroneous and should be disregarded.

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

Marie v. Police Jury of Parish of Terrebonne

161 So. 2d 407 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 2, 1964

"The jurisprudence of this State is well established that a police jury, as a political subdivision of the State, falls within the scope of the doctrine of sovereign immunity. … clearly alleged acts that constitute a taking of property, viz: "`2.

Smith v. State

152 Ind. App. 654 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 30, 1972

The record is devoid of any evidence that defendant was áttemptihg to gain immunity or hoping to “make a deal” as he now contends. … Based upon our discussion of the other issues herein, we are convinced that defendant’s conviction was clearly established. Affirmed. White, P.J. and Buchanan, J., concur. Note. — Reported in 284 N. E. 2d 522 .

Stasz v. Schwab

17 Cal. Rptr. 3d 116 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 5, 2004

This rule—immunizing arbitrators in private contractual arbitration proceedings from tort liability—is well established in California.” (Moore v. … (Note, Redefining Arbitral Immunity: A Proposed Qualified Immunity Statute for Arbitrators (1993) 44 Hastings L.J. 421 , 430 (hereafter Note), fn. omitted.)

Radloff v. State

116 Mich. App. 745 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 8, 1982

Clearly this was a proprietary function. … To summarize the preceding, we conclude that the following findings by the trial court were not clearly erroneous: (1) the defendants were not entitled to the defense of governmental immunity; (2) the defendants were in complete

Thorp v. Strigari

155 Ohio App. 3d 245 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 7, 2003

The immunity from suit can be absolute or qualified. See Míreles v. Waco (1991), 502 U.S. 9, 9-12 , 112 S.Ct. 286 , 116 L.Ed.2d 9 ; Barlow v. Fitzgerald (1982), 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 . … The Thorp appellants have failed to sustain their burden of establishing that the immunity granted to public defenders by R.C.

Pearce v. US Fidelity and Guar. Co.

10 Fla. L. Weekly 2326 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 9, 1985

The appellees say the legislative intent clearly is to facilitate Division *752 investigation of possibly fraudulent insurance claims, and that, to assist in this objective, immunity is granted for reporting suspicions of … Failure to establish any one element will destroy the cause of action. Weissman v. K-Mart Corporation, 396 So.2d 1164 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

Erie County Agricultural Society v. Cluchey

49 A.D.2d 40 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 18, 1975

The property must also be used for a purpose recognized by the Legislature as qualifying for tax exemption (see Real Property Tax Law, art 4 generally). … Property used primarily to obtain revenue or profit is not held for a public use and is not ordinarily immune from taxation, but property held by a State agency primarily for a public use does not lose immunity because the

DIXON FINANCIAL SERVICES, LTD. v. Chang

325 S.W.3d 668 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Feb 18, 2010

In support of its holding that Chang, Johnson, Burnett, and JBC enjoy qualified immunity, the majority relies upon, "as law of the case," Dixon Fin. Servs., Ltd. v. … As alleged, his fraudulent action, "foreign to the duties of an attorney," is not subject to qualified immunity.

Thomas v. CLAY COUNTY ELECTION BOARD

261 S.W.3d 574 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jun 3, 2008

S.D.1992)(stating that the reference to a public entity’s property for purposes of sovereign immunity “clearly refers to ownership of a property interest which allows a public entity to control the property.”); see also Terry … Conclusion James does not establish a bright line 25-foot perimeter test with respect to what constitutes an election board’s property for purposes of sovereign immunity.

Proctor & Gamble Cellulose Co. v. Mann

667 So. 2d 338 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 24, 1995

court ruled that, because P & G had no liability under the law to secure workers' compensation benefits for Mann, P & G did not qualify for immunity from Mann's suit under Chapter 440. … Further, to establish a statutory employment relationship, the entity claimed to be a contractor must have incurred a contractual obligation to a third party and must have delegated or sublet a part of its contractual obligation

State of Florida Department of etc. v. Lisa O'Connor, f/k/a Lisa Zane

155 So. 3d 479 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 19, 2015

The Department rightly points out that sovereign immunity must be clearly and unequivocally waived. … court orders, as O’Connor has established under Chapter 717.

Herrera v. Conner

111 Idaho 1012 · Idaho Court of Appeals · Feb 26, 1987

Under Harlow, supra, the test defining the limits of an officer’s good faith immunity is whether the officer’s conduct violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … The district court ruled that Herrera failed to show that the rights allegedly violated were clearly established at the time of the conduct at issue.

City of Dallas v. Albert

140 S.W.3d 920 · Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · Aug 27, 2004

It is well established that sovereign immunity from suit protects the State of Texas, its agencies, and its officials from lawsuits for damages unless it is waived by clear and unambiguous consent to suit. See Fed. … The claims presented by appellees are clearly germane to the counterclaims brought by the City. Accordingly, the City has waived its governmental immunity from appellees’ suits. See id.

Lowman v. Dankert

39 A.D.3d 1273 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 20, 2007

The acts of North and Peters were performed in the exercise of their judicial functions as town justices of the Town of Collins, and those defendants are thus immune from liability (see generally Murray v Brancato, 290 NY … The evidence further establishes that “it was objectively reasonable for [Dankert] to believe that [her] conduct was appropriate under the circumstances,” and thus her conduct is subject to a qualified privilege (Baez v City

Palmer v. Bartosh

959 A.2d 508 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 2008

A demurrer can only be sustained where the complaint clearly is insufficient to establish the pleader’s right to relief. County of Allegheny v. Commonwealth, 507 Pa. 360 , 490 A.2d 402 (1985). … The Act waives governmental immunity only for certain negligent acts of the agency or its employees; where the employee’s conduct is intentional in nature, the local agency retains its governmental immunity. 42 Pa.C.S. §

Serrano v. Chicago Board of Education

257 Ill. App. 3d 888 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 26, 1994

Furthermore, the plaintiff must then establish that (1) the scaffold or device was unsafe; (2) the unsafe condition caused the plaintiff’s injury; (3) the defendant was in charge of the work at the time of the injury; and … If we were to adopt such a broad reading of section 3 — 108(a), the term 'activity’ would engender activities clearly beyond what have been typically and historically regarded as governmental functions.

Bertram A. Graves, M.D. v. Indiana University Health, f/k/a Clarian Health Partners, Inc., Richard Kovacs, M.D., and Edward Ross, M.D.

32 N.E.3d 1196 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 5, 2015

Specifically, the trial court determined that the Appellees were protected by peer-review immunity, Dr. Graves had not established discrimination, and the claims against Drs. … Graves has failed to establish that the trial court’s decision in this regard is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 49A05-1412-PL-560

In Re Carroll

339 N.J. Super. 429 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 24, 2001

POINT II: THE DECISION BELOW IS CONTRARY TO ESTABLISHED LAW IN THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, WHICH HOLDS THAT A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WHO IS GRANTED USE IMMUNITY AND IS THEN WARNED OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF DECLINING TO ANSWER … have been clearly advised of his use immunity at the outset as a prerequisite to the subsequent imposition of a disciplinary sanction for refusal to make a statement.