Case law

B.K. v. Cox

116 S.W.3d 351 · Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Aug 28, 2003

The summary judgment was proper only if the movants conclusively established each element of this defense. See Science Spectrum, Inc. v. Martinez, 941 S.W.2d 910, 911 (Tex.1997). … Obviously, a judge qualifies as a governmental official, but judges need not resort to offi *360 cial immunity because judicial immunity is broader.

Estate of Herington v. County of Woodford

250 Ill. App. 3d 870 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 9, 1993

Tort Immunity Act) (Ill. … If plaintiffs established the culverts were an improvement to real property, section 13 — 214(a) of the Code would apply; if not, section 8 — 101 of the Tort Immunity Act would apply. Zimmer, 242 Ill.

McHale v. COLE

119 Pa. Commw. 334 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 8, 1988

However, evidence was submitted to the trial court which established that MCS’ designation does not entitle it, in this case, to immunity as a governmental agency. … The record clearly establishes that Cole was a voluntary out-patient and that on three occasions immediately prior to the rape, he requested in-patient treatment.

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

Gauthier v. O'BRIEN

606 So. 2d 915 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 21, 1992

At issue is the effect of the 1987 amendment to LSA-C.C. art. 2324, which establishes the scope of solidary liability in tort cases. … Clearly, this covers all immune persons, including employers who are immune by statute.

Thurman v. Champaign Park District

2011 IL App (4th) 101024 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 10, 2011

Fourth District Docket No. 4-10-1024 Argued July 13, 2011 Filed August 10, 2011 Held The Tort Immunity Act immunized defendant … of public entities in Tort Immunity cases to the exclusion of common[-]law definitions.”

Shirley Lenoir, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Shana Lenoir and Christopher McKnight , Individually and as Next Friend of Nayla McKnight v. U.T. Physicians

Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Aug 5, 2015

—Amarillo 1982, writ dism’d) (holding that UIL failed to establish that it qualified as governmental entity in its own right or as part of UT–Austin, even though UIL was created at urging of UT–Austin president). … Because we have concluded that UTP has not met its burden to establish that it qualifies as a governmental unit or to otherwise assert a right to governmental immunity from its relationship with UTHSC-H, we conclude that

Carter v. Du Page County Sheriff

304 Ill. App. 3d 443 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 12, 1999

Plaintiff contends that the Tort Immunity Act does not apply because (1) the standard of care established in sections 11—205 and 11—907 of the IIlinois Vehicle Code (Vehicle Code) (625 ILCS 5/11—205, 11—907 (West 1996)) supercedes … This argument is clearly erroneous for two reasons. First, and most disturbingly, the language counsel relies upon and quotes at length comes, not from the court’s opinion, but from a special concurring opinion.

Acres v. Marston

California Court of Appeal · Nov 18, 2021

Fitzsimmons (1993) 509 U.S. 259, 268 [“Most public officials are entitled only to qualified immunity.”].) … Respondents never clearly explain why Ramsey is entitled to judicial immunity, other than to note that she is an associate judge of the tribal court.

Anderson v. National Carriers, Inc.

10 Kan. App. 2d 203 · Court of Appeals of Kansas · Feb 28, 1985

The plaintiff, therefore, does not qualify as a statutory employee of the defendant and the trial court did not err by holding that National Carrier is a third-party tortfeasor not immune from suit. … Relevant evidence is defined as evidence that has a tendency in reason to establish a material fact. Schmeck v. City of Shawnee, 232 Kan. 11, 32 , 651 P.2d 585 (1982).

Rodriguez v. Commonwealth

59 A.3d 45 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 9, 2013

We affirm the trial court’s holding that an exception from sovereign immunity has not been established for such a claim. The accident occurred on U.S. … In order for a Commonwealth party to be held liable, the plaintiff must establish that the cause of action falls under one of the specifically enumerated exceptions to immunity. Fagan v.

Morrison v. Warrensville Hts.

2022 Ohio 1489 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 5, 2022

Under the first tier of the analysis, the City qualifies as a political subdivision. R.C. 2744.01(F). … Therefore, the City is entitled to immunity from suit unless Morrison can establish under the second tier that one of the exceptions to immunity applies.

Vasquez-Cromer v. Toledo

2019 Ohio 5149 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 13, 2019

R.C. 2744.02(B) apply, and (4) whether appellee is entitled to a defense or qualified immunity under R.C. 2744.03(A). Beck ex rel. Estate of Beck v. Adam Wholesalers of Toledo, Inc., 6th Dist. Sandusky No. … We do not find appellants met their burden to create any issues of fact that were both genuine and material to establish appellee is not immune from liability, and appellee is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Com. v. Lehman, R.

231 A.3d 877 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 6, 2020

-5- J-A29018-19 The burden of proof under the Drug Overdose Response Immunity Act is not on the Commonwealth; rather, the defendant must establish that he is entitled to … if the person can establish the following . . .”).

Vinh Huu Cao & Mai Hong Luu v. Kelly Hancock, in His Official Capacity as Acting Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts

Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District · Sep 11, 2025

The question is thus whether chapter 113 clearly authorizes a suit against the Comptroller to declare whether specific property is in or out. … and courts declare which specific items of real and personal property to which a state tax lien does or does not attach.30 Third, even if chapter 113 clearly and unambiguously waived immunity, the homeowners still

Peterson v. Ballard

292 N.J. Super. 575 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 15, 1996

The litigation privilege is firmly established in New Jersey case law. Hawkins v. Harris, 141 N.J. 207, 215 , 661 A. 2d 284 (1995). … However, in determining whether a common law immunity has been abrogated the Court stated the rule clearly: Our cases have proceeded upon the assumption that common-law principles of legislative and judicial immunity were

Trey Brooks, Tristan Brooks and Alandre' Brooks Individually and on Behalf of Donovan Brooks v. Bienville Parish Police Jury, Bienville Parish Sheriff, John E. Ballance, Charlotte Hubbard, Shawn Hubbard, City of Ringgold and Gerald Miller

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 1, 2025

The Gray court ultimately determined that the BPPJ had immunity under La. R.S. 9:2798.1 and obligated to establish a shelter or service for sheltering vicious animals. La. … R.S. 3:2774, which clearly mandates that the parish “shall provide” suitable shelters or facilities “for dogs seized.”

City of Round Rock and Round Rock Fire Chief Larry Hodge v. Mark Whiteaker

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Nov 16, 2007

Whiteaker clearly has standing to assert his claims. … has clearly and unambiguously stated otherwise"). (10) The supreme court has also stated that sovereign immunity protects the state and its subdivisions against suits seeking to "control state action."

Leasoff v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation

59 Pa. Commw. 45 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 1981

S. §5110 (Act 152 of 1978), which re-established governmental immunity subject to several exceptions in which immunity was waived, such as personal injuries resulting from “[p]otholes and other dangerous conditions.” … Although the Legislature expressed its intent that the re-establishment of immunity should receive retroactive effect, Section 5(b) of the Act of September 28, 1978, P.L. 788 (Act 152), infra note 2, the Supreme Court held

Armbruster v. West Unity Police Department

127 Ohio App. 3d 478 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 1, 1998

APPENDIX A The assignments of error are: “Ohio Revised Code Section 2744.02(B), by incorporating Ohio Revised Code Section 2744.03, provides a qualified immunity to political subdivisions.” … The Sixth District Court of Appeals has clearly and regularly followed the three-tier immunity analysis discussed above. See Fowler v. Williams Cty.