Case law

Ryan v. Fox Television Stations, Inc.

979 N.E.2d 954 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 23, 2012

a standard for invoking immunity under the Act. … See id. ¶ 45; see also id. ¶ 50 (“We believe that, had the legislature intended to radically alter the common law by imposing a qualified privilege on defamation within the process of petitioning the government

By Lo Oil Co. v. Department of Treasury

267 Mich. App. 19 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 2, 2005

A trial court properly grants a motion for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(7) when the undisputed facts establish that the moving party is entitled to immunity granted by law. … “If the undisputed facts show that the defendant’s conduct violated no clearly established constitutional standards, qualified immunity applies as a matter of law.” Id.

Abo-Saif v. Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

2022 IL App (1st) 211091 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 30, 2022

In 2020, plaintiff filed this action against defendant for money damages for breach of the settlement agreement and a declaratory judgment that he should be given another opportunity to qualify for readmission to the juris … As in Ellis, “the plaintiff’s suit in the instant case is clearly based upon a present claim which has the potential to subject the State to liability and thus must be brought in the Court of Claims.” Id. at 395.

Martin v. Brady

64 Conn. App. 433 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Jul 24, 2001

The record establishes the relevant procedural history. … This argument confuses sovereign immunity with statutory immunity. If the defendants have established their defense of sovereign immunity, they need not demonstrate their compliance with § 4-165. Shay v.

Martin, Wise & Fitzhugh v. Johnson

11 Tex. Civ. App. 628 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Nov 16, 1895

*631 voters of said county, thereby establishing the office of public weigher in said county, and made the same elective at the next election thereafter.” (4) That on or about November 4, 1884, he was by the legal voters … The very terms of the statute under which the cause of action arises, and the liability is claimed, clearly indicates that such a suit may be maintained under it. The assignment is without merit.

Genesee County Road Commission v. State Highway Commission

86 Mich. App. 294 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 3, 1978

The Court of Claims was established by the Legislature under the authority of Const 1963, art 9, § 22 and art 6, § 26. … Thus, since the maintenance of roadways is clearly a governmental function, Thomas v Dep’t of State Highway, 398 Mich 1, 11 ; 247 NW2d 530 (1976), plaintiffs’ right to bring this action is dependent upon the applicability

Crafton v. State

450 N.E.2d 1042 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 1983

After a short recess, Sells stated, "Judge, I want to qualify that immunity a little bit. I want to make it in accordance with the statute. I don't think I'm authorized to grant any immunity in excess of the statute." … EPPERLY'S PATTERSON STATEMENT Debbie Epperly was called as a witness by the State, and after some preliminary questions establishing that she had been arrested for Barker's robbery and was granted immunity in exchange for

Mulvey v. Carl Sandburg High School

2016 IL App (1st) 151615 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 13, 2017

Id. ¶ 45 Our supreme court has established a two-part test to determine which employees may be granted immunity under section 2-201 of the Tort Immunity Act. … First, an employee may qualify for immunity “if he holds either a position involving the determination of policy or a position involving the exercise of discretion.” (Emphases in original.)

Stringwell v. Ann Arbor Pub. School Dist.

686 N.W.2d 825 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 15, 2004

If the language of the statute is unambiguous, the Legislature must have intended the meaning clearly expressed, and the statute must be enforced as written. No further judicial construction is required or permitted. … The record establishes that a teacher for the school told the student to start the vehicle so that the class could check the vehicle's fluid levels.

Handlin v. Burkhart

101 A.D.2d 850 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 21, 1984

A qualified privilege does not afford a defendant an absolute immunity, but it does negate any presumption of implied malice flowing from the defamatory statement (see Toker v Poliak, supra; 35 NY Jur, Libel and Slander, … Mataxes’ affidavit and supporting documentation in opposition to the motion for summary judgment is devoid of the requisite evidentiary facts needed to establish that defendants were motivated by malice.

J.A.J. Liquor Store, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

102 A.D.2d 240 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 11, 1984

The court found that the California resale price maintenance scheme satisfied the first prong of' the test for antitrust immunity, in that the legislative policy of permitting resale price maintenance was clearly reflected … A two-pronged test for determining the applicability of antitrust immunity has been established: “First, the challenged restraint must be ‘one clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed as state policy’; second, the

Jergensen v. Massachusetts Historical Commission

33 Mass. L. Rptr. 615 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Nov 21, 2016

. §207 are barred, as a matter of law, by the principle of sovereign immunity. … Maine, 527 U.S. 706, 754 (1999) (“we hold that the States retain immunity from private suit in their own courts, an immunity beyond the congressional power to abrogate by Article I legislation”).

Syska v. Montgomery County Board of Education

45 Md. App. 626 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 10, 1980

Immunizations. … Thus, she argues that the religious exemption clauses offend the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment by favoring "the protected religion” and also offends the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth

Dallas County Constable Precinct No. 5 v. Garden City Boxing Club, Inc.

219 S.W.3d 613 · Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · Apr 5, 2007

Chambers, 883 S.W.2d 650, 653 (Tex.1994) (officer has burden to establish affirmative defense of immunity by establishing he performed discretionary duty in good faith while acting within scope of authority); see also Abercia … (constable failed to establish affirmative defense of immunity as matter of law). We overrule Dupree’s first, second, and third issues.

Tubra v. Cooke

233 Or. App. 339 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 27, 2010

qualified privilege. … Unlike a situation where the Free Exercise Clause provides immunity from suit, cf. Mitchell v.

Rogers v. State ex rel. Department of Public Safety & Corrections

7 La.App. 3 Cir. 1060 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 2008

In their sole assignment of error, Defendants assert that the trial court erred in denying their peremptory exception of no right of action where there was no evidence in the record establishing that plain *922 tiffs possessed … JjDISCUSSION An appellate court may not set aside a trial court’s finding of fact in the absence of manifest error or unless it is clearly wrong. Rosell v. ESCO, 549 So.2d 840 (La.1989).

Starnes v. International Harvester Co.

141 Ill. App. 3d 652 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 17, 1986

When only qualified privilege is granted, the person making the statement is immune from liability unless some element such as malice is present. … The court recognized that not all complaints to administrative agencies had that immunity but if the agency had judicial powers, the same consideration requiring immunity for complaints to courts were operative.

Worthington v. State

181 Ind. App. 365 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jul 17, 1979

Unless the court finds that the issuance of the order would be clearly contrary to public interest, the witness shall comply with the order of the court. … However, it was established by the United States Supreme Court in Kastigar v.

Greeson v. MacKinaw Township

207 Ill. App. 3d 193 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 13, 1990

Clearly this function is discretionary. … It is a well established principle of the common law that an immunity exists in favor of public officials when they are exercising their official discretion on matters which are discretionary in nature and not ministerial

Blauer v. Department of Workforce Services

759 Utah Adv. Rep. 37 · Court of Appeals of Utah · May 1, 2014

. § 12112 (b)(5)(A) (requiring employers to make "reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual with a disability who is an applicant or employee"), and the Utah … Expense Bd., 527 U.S. 666, 686-87 , 119 S.Ct. 2219 , 144 L.Ed.2d 605 (1999), "the mere receipt of federal funds cannot establish that a State has consented to suit in federal court," Atascadero State Hosp. v.