Case law

Goebel v. Minster

2020 Ohio 5467 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 2020

Thus we must proceed to the third tier of the immunity analysis. {¶28} Minster argues on appeal that even if we determined that appellees alleged sufficient facts to establish that their injuries were the result … This is not a finding that Minster is necessarily liable or even that immunity could not be established later in a summary judgment proceeding if undisputed facts warranted such a finding.

Esther Garcia Ortega v. State

472 S.W.3d 779 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 30, 2015

The State has no burden to show compliance with Miranda unless and until the record as a whole “clearly establishes” that the defendant’s statement was the product of a custodial interrogation. Id. … Thus, appellant could not qualify for immunity under section 47.08 even if such immunity could be triggered by an unwarned custodial interrogation. We overrule appellant’s fourth issue. IV.

Howeth Investments, Inc. v. City of Hedwig Village

259 S.W.3d 877 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Apr 17, 2008

, qualified immunity, judicial immunity, legislative immunity, and the federal Volunteer Protection Act. 8 Appel-lees also asserted a counterclaim seeking an injunction to prevent the Howeth parties from selling the Brogden … Third, the trial court concluded, in legal conclusions 1 through 3, that the individual defendants were entitled to four types of immunity — official immunity, qualified immunity, judicial immunity, and immunity under the

Mosley v. Observer Publishing Co.

422 Pa. Super. 255 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 19, 1993

Commonwealth, 507 Pa. 360, 372 , 490 A.2d 402, 408 (1985): A demurrer can only be sustained where the complaint is clearly insufficient to establish the pleader’s right to relief. Firing v. … Appellee urges this Court to affirm the order of the trial court because he is immune by reason of well established absolute privileges, specifically, the absolute privilege accorded to communications in a judicial proceeding

State v. Merriman

287 S.C. 74 · Court of Appeals of South Carolina · Nov 8, 1985

There a witness was not qualified to sit on the jury because he had been a juror in a previous trial of the same case. … The question clearly elicited the reply which it received.

Musmeci v. American Automobile Insurance Company

146 So. 2d 496 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 1, 1962

City of Shreveport is clearly distinguishable from this case. … It is well established in our law that the defense of immunity of governmental agencies and charitable institutions for torts of their agents and servants is a defense which is personal to the institution or sovereign itself

Christopherson v. City of Albert Lea

623 N.W.2d 272 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Mar 13, 2001

Minn.Stat. §§ 466.04 (establishing maximum limits of liability), 466.06 (procuring liability insurance waives a municipality’s liability only to the extent of coverage). … Such a decision was clearly policy-making, not operational, in nature because it involved balancing financial and policy considerations.

Nadrowski v. Cleveland

2022 Ohio 3232 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 15, 2022

R.C. 2744.02(A)(1) establishes a general grant of sovereign immunity, providing that a political subdivision is not liable for damages for injury, death, or loss to person or property incurred in connection with … The record demonstrates that Nadrowski could not clearly identify where she fell or what caused her to fall.

State ex rel. Missouri Highway & Transportation Commission v. Ryan

741 S.W.2d 828 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Nov 24, 1987

We have done so, however, where refusal to utilize the writ will compel a party to undergo a clearly unwarranted and useless litigation. See, e.g., State ex rel. O’Blennis v. Adolf, 691 S.W.2d 498, 500 (Mo.App.1985). … the negligent acts or omissions by public employees arising out of the operation of motor vehicles within the course of their employment; (2) Injuries caused by the condition of a public entity’s property if the plaintiff established

In re Reglan Litigation

2013 Pa. Super. 216 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 29, 2013

Three of the officers sought summary judgment based on qualified immunity, arguing that the plaintiff could point to no evidence that they had beaten him or were present while others did so. … While Wyeth attempts to recast its issue on appeal as purely a legal one, we find that, as in Johnson , we are not dealing with the application of clearly established law to a given set of facts.

Curcini v. County of Alameda

164 Cal. App. 4th 629 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 5, 2008

Appellants also contend the court erred in sustaining the demurrer as to their fraud causes of action, arguing that the complaint sufficiently alleges the requisite corruption and malice to overcome the qualified immunity … by appellants, and that the individual sheriff’s office employees were immune under Government Code sections 820.2 and 822.2, as appellants had failed to allege “facts to establish the elements of fraud or facts showing

Lucero v. Salazar

117 N.M. 802 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · May 11, 1994

established, and the right is not absolute or unqualified."). … To establish who was a foreseeable plaintiff in situations where negligent infliction of emotional distress was alleged, Ramirez established the following criteria: 1.

Straub v. City of Mt. Olive

240 Ill. App. 3d 967 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 28, 1993

Vogt, as a member of the City’s park board, qualifies as an employee protected by the Act. … Neilson and Miller qualify for immunity from a negligence cause of action because they too were acting as volunteers on behalf of the City.

Texas Department of Criminal Justice v. Robert Guard

Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco) · Apr 11, 2007

ISSUES PRESENTED In its first issue, the TDCJ argues that it is immune from suit because Guard failed to exhaust administrative remedies and failed to establish a claim under the Labor Code. … To waive sovereign immunity and confer subject matter jurisdiction under Chapter 21, an administrative complaint must be timely filed and an entity must qualify as an employer.

State v. Peterson

532 N.W.2d 813 · Court of Appeals of Iowa · Mar 30, 1995

An abuse of discretion appears only when it was “exercised on grounds or for reasons clearly untenable or to an extent clearly unreasonable.” Id. We are unable to find an abuse of discretion. … Finally, McCarthy’s own statement established Peterson knew the marijuana was in the car and intended to sell it.

Santa Fe Pacific Gold Corp. v. United Nuclear Corp.

143 N.M. 215 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Aug 22, 2007

Id. {39} Ordinary work product, or “non-opinion” work product, has a qualified immunity. Id. ¶ 19. … A party asserting work-product protection bears the burden of establishing that the rule applies for each document by showing the existence of precise facts in support of the claim of immunity.

Kirk v. Regents of University of California

273 Cal. App. 2d 430 · California Court of Appeal · May 28, 1969

Petitioner, on the other hand, prior to her marriage and as a single adult, was capable of and had established a residence in Ohio. … Under this standard, *439 the waiting period requirement clearly violates the Equal Protection Clause.21 ’ ’ (Italics partially added.) Were there only this language in the opinion, we would agree with petitioner.

Amato, T. v. Bell & Gossett

116 A.3d 607 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 17, 2015

The Uniform Contribution Among Tort-feasors Act (“UCATA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 8321-8327, establishes a framework for accounting for settlement payments made by joint tortfeasors. … Here, Crane failed to (1) join other settling tortfeasors into the action or (2) submit evidence to establish that the non-parties were joint tortfeasors.

Koppenhaver v. Department of Community & Economic Development

898 A.2d 654 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 3, 2006

Bd. of Revision of Taxes, 574 Pa. 707 , 833 A.2d 710 (2003), for the proposition that a Commonwealth agency will lose its tax immune status if it acts outside its authorized purpose or outside the scope of its immunity. 9 … They raise legal issues clearly beyond the Department’s scope of review under 53 Pa.C.S. § 8211(d). Bundy; Mellinger, Property *667 Owners.

CITY OF MIAMI v. LYN M. ROBINSON

District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 31, 2023

Florida Statutes section 768.28 clearly and unequivocally provides for waiver of sovereign immunity in certain tort actions against a governmental entity. … The City presented a factual predicate establishing nonwaiver of sovereign immunity under sections 768.28(1) and 768.28(9).