Case law

Shands Jacksonville Medical Center, Inc., and University of Florida Board of Trustees

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 11, 2024

Because the government is immune to suit, it “cannot be sued, except with its own consent. … the ALJ clearly cannot possess.

City of Hidalgo v. Prado

996 S.W.2d 364 · Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Jun 24, 1999

We hold De Leon has established his entitlement to official immunity. 6. … immunity.

Soedler v. Soedler

89 Ill. App. 3d 74 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 7, 1980

Keller (1952), 413 Ill. 503 , 109 N.E.2d 729 , amended the Married Woman’s Act so as to re-establish interspousal tort immunity. In Brandt v. … The constitutionality of the establishment of interspousal tort immunity was attacked in Heckendorn v.

Kirkwood v. State

16 Neb. Ct. App. 459 · Nebraska Court of Appeals · Feb 26, 2008

A trial court is allowed discretion in determining whether a witness is qualified to testify as an expert, and unless the court's finding is clearly erroneous, such a determination will not be disturbed on appeal. Id. … The court further stated that it found Wilson's testimony to be "entirely credible" and found Wilson to be "extremely well qualified and possessing what is clearly a passion for the safety of the traveling public."

City of Edinburg v. Kenia Abigail Cazares, Individually and A/N/F of K v. and J.E. Jr., Minors

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Aug 20, 2026

Standard of Review Political subdivisions of the State such as Edinburg are generally immune from suit unless immunity has been clearly and unambiguously waived by the legislature. TEX. … Thus, a party can only survive a plea to the jurisdiction “by showing that the statute ‘clearly and affirmatively waive[s] immunity’ and by also ‘negating any provisions that create exceptions to, and thus withdraw, that

People v. JACOBAZZI

398 Ill. App. 3d 890 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 17, 2010

We are not convinced that the qualifier stated in Wilson is a definitive part of the law-of-the-case doctrine. … The qualifier is not enforced to the letter even among the courts that subscribe to it.

State v. Jacob

125 Or. App. 643 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 5, 1994

Defendant moved to compel the state to grant immunity to the witnesses, which the court denied. … On the other hand, the same words spoken under different circumstances, e.g., to an acquaintance, would have no difficulty in qualifying.”

Katz v. Rahway Hosp.

214 N.J. Super. 379 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 19, 1986

The hospital also contends that it was unduly prejudiced by the trial judge's refusal to exclude the testimony of Gerald O'Rourke, who testified as an expert in security, because he was not qualified as an expert on hospital … Tp. of North Bergen, 77 N.J. 538, 559 (1978), and the intent to change the common law must be clearly and plainly expressed because an intent to alter the common law rule further than clearly expressed is not to be implied

Berner v. New Leaf Residential Servs., Inc.

2024 Ohio 1788 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 9, 2024

Under the first tier of the analysis, there is no dispute that CCBDD qualifies as a political subdivision. … Therefore, CCBDD is entitled to immunity from suit unless Berner can establish under the second tier that one of the exceptions to immunity applies.

Holten v. Syncreon North America, Inc.

2019 IL App (2d) 180537 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 22, 2019

Moreover, plaintiff contends, Android failed to establish the existence of a borrowed-employee relationship and thus was not entitled to immunity under the Act. ¶ 31 A. … ¶ 1. ¶ 45 In reversing, we rejected Exelon’s argument that it was entitled to immunity as the agent of ENS because Exelon failed to establish that ENS had any right to control Exelon.

Mitter v. St. John the Baptist Parish

920 So. 2d 263 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 27, 2005

It is well established, however, that where it is attempted to establish an exception to a general rule, strict construction is required and the exception is not to be recognized unless it is clearly established. … In my opinion, the exception in question here is not clearly established and, thus, this *270 Court should not recognize that exception.

Coon v. Deputy Sheriff's Education & Training Board

111 Pa. Commw. 176 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 19, 1987

That statutory standard clearly provides a yardstick for the board’s specific review of county curricula. … for deputy sheriff training by utilizing existing facilities, programs and qualified State and local personnel.

Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services v. Rosa Maria Beltran

Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) · Aug 31, 2011

In its plea, the Department asserted that it was protected by sovereign immunity because the "Legislature has not clearly and unambiguously waived sovereign immunity for [the Anti-Retaliation Law]" as required after the Legislature's … As a result, because the Political Subdivisions Law no longer clearly and unambiguously waives governmental immunity, the Court dismissed Ms. Norman's retaliatory-discharge claim. Id.

Brasel v. Children's Services Division

56 Or. App. 559 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 22, 1982

The burden is on the state to establish its immunity, either by (1) the nature of the function, or (2) evidence of how the decision was made. 290 Or at 15 . … We conclude, therefore, that the state may not, in this case, establish its claim of discretionary authority at the pleading stage.

Muckleshoot Indian Tribe v. Dept. of Ecology

50 P.3d 668 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 29, 2002

Moreover, qualifying the types of contracts excluded from the act reduces the number of contracts barred from review under the WAPA. … Ecology and the City contend that the IFA is clearly not a proprietary contract. They assert that "proprietary," in this context, refers to the doctrine of a government's sovereign immunity from citizen lawsuit.

Nickon v. City of Princeton

376 Ill. App. 3d 1095 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 24, 2007

Defendant contends the Medicare payment does not qualify as a collateral source under Illinois law. … Defendant’s instruction addressed statutory municipal immunity, as defined in section 3 — 102 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/3 — 102 (West 2002)) (Tort Immunity Act).

City of Houston and Daniel W. Kruger, in His Official Capacity as Director of Public Works and Engineering Department v. Little Nell Apartments, L.P.

424 S.W.3d 640 · Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Jan 23, 2014

The City and Krueger filed a plea to the jurisdiction based on governmental immunity. … Thus, once and if the Apartments have met their pleading requirement, as the movants, the City and Krueger have the burden to establish their entitlement to governmental immunity. See id.

State of California v. Superior Court

37 Cal. App. 3d 1023 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 15, 1974

[Rjeal parties in interest, although recognizing that there is immunity for discretionary acts of [the county’s] employees . . . , contend that there is no immunity with respect to ministerial acts and that the alleged acts … Since all of American’s alleged causes of action clearly fall within that ambit, a writ of prohibition as prayed for is hereby granted. Gardner, P. J., and Kaufman, J., concurred.

Burke v. Deml

Vermont Superior Court · Aug 13, 2024

This type of immunity is different from qualified immunity, which lower- level state employees are entitled to claim. … Qualified immunity involves both a test and balancing between the nature of the decision, whether it was made in good faith, and the scope of the employment. Murray v. White, 155 Vt. 621, 627 (1991).

Samaritan Foundation v. Superior Court

173 Ariz. 426 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Feb 2, 1993

Procedure 26(b)(3), which provides qualified discovery immunity for material prepared in anticipation of litigation: [A] party may obtain discovery of documents ... otherwise discoverable 6 ... and prepared in anticipation … Work Product Immunity or Qualified Privilege: We have one reservation, however, about leaving non-control group communications wholly to the protection of the work product rule.