Case law

Coley v. City of Hartford

140 Conn. App. 315 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Jan 22, 2013

“General Statutes § 52-557n abandons the common-law principle of municipal sovereign immunity and establishes the circumstances in which a municipality may be hable for damages.” Doe v. … Such a duty is therefore not a ministerial duty, for violation of which a municipal official lacks qualified governmental immunity, and thus may lawfully be sued.

People v. Bartolomeo

126 A.D.2d 375 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 30, 1987

That’s clearly an admission. It would have been relevant. It would have been admissible. "[The Prosecutor]: It’s clearly hearsay, Your Honor. What Manteiga had to say to his wife from—about Bartolomeo. "the court: Yes. … Caprisecca had executed a waiver of immunity when he testified before the Grand Jury; however, it was never revealed that he had been promised immunity from prosecution for those crimes.

Jastram v. Lake Villa School District 41

192 Ill. App. 3d 599 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 27, 1989

Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment alleging that a school district is liable only for willful and wanton misconduct and that the undisputed facts in this case do not establish willful and wanton misconduct. … App. 3d 434 ; however, the facts do not clearly establish who, if anyone, was charged with supervising the plaintiff in that case. Inasmuch as- the case is unclear on this point, we cannot rely on it.

Tarzia v. Town of Hingham

35 Mass. App. Ct. 506 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Nov 22, 1993

of different methods of silt and vegetation removal, the effect of using the control gates presently in place or installing new ones, the impact of removal procedures on surrounding areas, the choice of the company most qualified … Here the pond whose overflow clearly contributed to the flooding of the plaintiffs’ land was artificially dammed at its northerly side and had control gates and sluices. 10 The town’s *512 land was not in its natural condition

State v. Godfrey

883 S.W.2d 550 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Sep 13, 1994

Where a defendant is clearly entitled to immunity, it is not necessary to wait through a trial and appeal to enforce that protection. State ex rel. Bd. of Trustees v. Russell, 843 S.W.2d 353, 355 (Mo. banc 1992). … However, plaintiffs’ claim fails to establish the third element for waiver of sovereign immunity: “that the dangerous- condition created a reasonably foreseeable risk of harm of the kind of injury which was incurred.” § 537.600.1

Johnson v. Detroit Metropolitan Airport

133 Mich. App. 603 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 3, 1984

That panel of this Court believed that the question was controlled by the following statutory section: "The acquisition of any lands for the purpose of establishing airports, landing fields or other aeronautical facilities … Clearly, this statute was designed by the Legislature to give the defendant the power of eminent domain, such as railroads, gas companies, and public utilities enjoy.

Hope v. NAT. ALLIANCE, JACKSONVILLE

649 So. 2d 897 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 31, 1995

immunity. [4] See Tucker v. … Although the immunity afforded to defamatory statements may indeed bar recovery for bona fide injuries, the chilling effect on free testimony would seriously hamper the adversary system if absolute immunity were not provided

Greene v. Succession of Alvarado

2015 La.App. 1 Cir. 1960 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 27, 2016

The evidence established that Terre-bonne Parish rarely experiences winter weather events sufficient to produce ice on roadways or bridges. … Tekell has not published any articles or taught any seminars on the subject, and he has never previously been qualified as having specific expertise in that area.

University of Incarnate Word and Christopher Carter v. Valerie Redus, Individually, and Robert M. Redus, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Robert Cameron Redus

Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · May 12, 2015

Hernandez: the legal status and authority of the employer results in a finding establishing the immunity of the employee; Rice University v. … employee qualified as an employee of a state agency.

Williams v. First United Church of Christ

40 Ohio App. 2d 187 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 9, 1973

Cir.), 130 F. 2d 810 , and remarked, at page 476 of its opinion: “We cannot state our general position on this question [the rule of immunity] more clearly than did Judge Rutledge state his as follows: “ ‘The law’s emphasis … The court recognized the exceptions to the doctrine of immunity for nonhospital charitable institutions established by Gibbon v. Y. W. C. A., supra, and Blankenship v.

City of Bruceville-Eddy, Texas v. Daniel Ferguson

Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco) · Nov 1, 2012

Accordingly, immunity will bar an otherwise proper UDJA suit that has the effect of establishing a right to relief against the State or its political subdivisions for which the Legislature has not waived immunity. … Further, there is nothing in sections 614.022-.023 that clearly and unambiguously waives the City’s immunity. See TEX.

Board of County Commissioners v. Arick

477 N.E.2d 112 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 22, 1985

In addition, they testified that water could cause the problem, and other testimony established that it had been raining that day. … Immunity from liability.

Proctor v. Department of Health & Environmental Control

368 S.C. 279 · Court of Appeals of South Carolina · Mar 20, 2006

“The governmental entity bears the burden of establishing discretionary immunity as an affirmative defense.” Sabb v. South Carolina State Univ., 350 S.C. 416 , 428, 567 S.E.2d 231, 237 (2002). … The statute clearly exempts from liability any loss resulting from the failure to enforce an ordinance; therefore, the County is immune from suit for any loss as a result of their non-enforcement of the animal control ordinance

Wellhausen v. University of Kansas

40 Kan. App. 2d 102 · Court of Appeals of Kansas · Aug 8, 2008

When opposing a motion for summary judgment, an adverse party must come forward with evidence to establish a dispute as to a material fact. … The Wellhausens point out that K.S.A. 75-6104(e) does not apply when “there is a clearly defined mandatory duty or guideline.” Nero, 253 Kan. at 585 .

Wilson v. School Dist. of Philadelphia

410 Pa. Super. 416 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 11, 1991

Therefore, this is clearly a “matter conducted pursuant to Sub-chapter C of Chapter 85.” … We may retain jurisdiction if such action would serve the interests of judicial economy, but should transfer the matter if to do so would serve other interests, such as avoiding the establishment of possibly conflicting lines

EPGT Texas Pipeline, L.P. v. Harris County Flood Control District

176 S.W.3d 330 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Sep 24, 2004

Thus, as movant on the affirmative defense of sovereign immunity, HCFCD has the burden to establish all the essential elements of the defense as a matter of law. Montgomery v. Kennedy, 669 S.W.2d 309, 310-11 (Tex.1984). … Once a movant establishes sovereign immunity as a matter of law, the burden of production shifts to the non-movant to establish a waiver of immunity. See Medrano v. City of Pearsall, 989 S.W.2d 141, 144 (Tex.App.

Allocca ex rel. Allocca v. New Mexico Department of Energy Minerals & Natural Resources

118 N.M. 668 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 1994

Because Defendants established on the record that Conchas Lake is a work used for the diversion or storage of water, the controlling question concerns whether there are genuine issues of material fact relative to Plaintiffs … The second sentence was clearly contemplated to apply to works having a dual use, such as storage of water and park activities. Bell did not call into question the continuing vitality of our observation in Espander.

Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board v. Sharon Funderburk

Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) · Jan 26, 2006

Thus, the law is settled that the TCHRA clearly and unambiguously waives governmental immunity for the governmental entities that are statutorily defined as employers. … The DFW Board appears to argue that the TCHRA must clearly and unambiguously waive governmental immunity specifically as to it. We cannot agree with this contention.

Texas Department of Health v. Texas Health Enterprises, Inc.

871 S.W.2d 498 · Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · Dec 10, 1993

Human Services administers the federally funded Medicaid program, and TDH certifies health-care facilities as qualified Medicaid providers. … Under the Medicaid provider agreement, Human Services agreed to pay the nursing home for providing services to Medicaid qualified residents and patients. The contract provides: I.

West American Insurance v. Popa

108 Md. App. 73 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 1, 1996

Frye , however, only indirectly addressed the issue we address today, and it involved parent-child immunity, not sovereign immunity* Although parent-child immunity is clearly based on the public policy of Maryland, the exclusionary … There, we noted that if an exclusion in an uninsured motorist policy were invalid, it would only be invalid up to the $20,000/$40,000 minimum; but we immediately qualified this statement by inserting a footnote recognizing