Case law

Lawson v. Mahoning Cty. Mental Health Bd.

2010 Ohio 6389 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 22, 2010

While the complaint clearly did raise common law claims against MCMHB, we find that the trial court did not commit error when it considered the immunity argument. ¶{7} The estate’s final argument is that the trial … It stated that immunity was raised for the first time in the response and thus, was outside the scope of its review and would not be considered. It then found that MCMHB failed to establish that R.C.

Clipse v. Gillis

20 Wash. App. 691 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 17, 1978

Counsel has not called to our attention, nor do we find from our own examination of the record, any facts which would tend to establish the illegality of the warrants, or their illegal execution. … If these preliminary questions can be clearly and unequivocally answered in the affirmative, then the challenged act, omission, or decision can, with a reasonable degree of assurance, be classified as a discretionary governmental

Garrison v. State

992 S.W.2d 898 · Missouri Court of Appeals · May 4, 1999

We conclude the finding of the motion court was not clearly erroneous. State v. … Movant’s fourth claim of error argues the judge who heard the motion, also the trial judge, is not qualified to decide one of the issues.

Cowell v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation

883 A.2d 705 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 29, 2005

any exception to sovereign immunity. … Preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer should be sustained only where the pleadings are clearly insufficient to establish a right to relief; any doubt must be resolved in favor of overruling the demurrer.

Warren v. New Hanover County Board of Education

104 N.C. App. 522 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 19, 1991

To establish a cause of action for wrongful discharge or demotion in violation of the employee’s First Amendment rights, the employee must show first “that the speech complained of qualified as protected speech or activity … Additionally, we find it unnecessary to address defendants’ arguments regarding qualified immunity.

Weaver v. City of Detroit

252 Mich. App. 239 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 26, 2002

Testimony presented at trial established that the rusty light pole, erected in 1970 and last inspected in 1979, was placed eighteen inches from the highway’s curb, which was in accordance with industry standards, and was … Consistent with this basic principle, “[n]o action may be maintained under the highway exception unless it is clearly within the scope and meaning of [MCL 691.1402(1)].” Weakley, supra at 326 .

City of South Padre Island v. Surfvive, Anubis Avalos, and Adonai Ramses Avalos

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Jun 9, 2022

Anubis Avalos, and Adonai Ramses Avalos lacked standing to challenge SPI’s ordinance; (3) appellees failed to establish a waiver of immunity from suit; and (4–6) appellees did not establish that the challenged sections … To proceed in a suit against state entities and officials, a plaintiff must establish a waiver of immunity, see Dall. Area Rapid Transit v.

Gutkaiss v. Delaware Ave. Merchants Group, Inc.

2019 NY Slip Op 4527 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 6, 2019

On appeal, the City argues that it is entitled to qualified immunity from this claim or, alternatively, that this claim must be dismissed because it had no prior written notice of the allegedly dangerous condition. … Thus, Supreme Court properly determined that the City failed to establish immunity from plaintiff's negligence claim.

First National Bank v. Commissioner

80 N.M. 699 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Sep 5, 1969

It seems illogical to us to hold that Congress intended to limit a state’s taxation on functions or services performed by national banks, when such functions or services are clearly not necessary, and not reasonably incident … First Bank Building Corp., 5 Ariz.App. 594 , 429 P.2d 481 (1967), the building corporation was duly organized and qualified to do business in Arizona.

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

Prendergast v. Cosco

4 A.D.3d 880 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 11, 2004

Although a municipality is afforded qualified immunity from liability arising out of its decisions with respect to highway planning, it may be held liable when it “is made aware of a dangerous highway condition and does not … Thus, we conclude that the Village failed to meet its burden of establishing that it is entitled to immunity from liability as a matter of law (see Ernest, 93 NY2d at 672-673 ).

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.

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).

Coleman v. State

70 Okla. Crim. 246 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 17, 1940

Ann., provides when immunity may be claimed in this state, and is as follows: “Any person having knowledge or possession of facts *251 that tend to establish the guilt of any other person or corporation charged with an offense … The facts in the instant case clearly show that no agreement was made with the county attorney, his assistants, or any other officer of Oklahoma county, as to his having immunity by reason of any statement which he might

the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston v. Kai Hui Qi

402 S.W.3d 374 · Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · May 30, 2013

They contend that Qi’s petition failed to allege “adequate grounds or facts to establish a waiver of sovereign immunity under the Texas Tort Claims Act or any other statute or constitutional provision.” … Act as the evidence conclusively established that the appellee’s alleged injuries and damages were not proximately caused by the negligent use of tangible personal property.”

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.

Taft v. Otte & Co.

274 Ill. App. 280 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 6, 1934

App. 428 ,” but the opinion contains the further statement that “it seems to be conceded that the stock was not qualified and was Class ‘C.’ ” In Jochum v. … Brady, supra, p. 430 ), this interpretation, in our judgment, is clearly wrong. In Oppenheimer v. Peabody, Houghteling & Co., supra, Mr.

Sandholm v. Kuecker

Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 18, 2010

Acts or statements made during legislative, judicial, or quasi-judicial proceedings are already protected by absolute or qualified privileges, including the protection of the right to petition the government as established … Pennington upheld the same antitrust immunity doctrine where coal companies and unions persuaded the Labor Department to establish minimum wages for employees of contractors, which frustrated the non-unionized companies

Scott v. Gunter

447 So. 2d 272 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 1, 1983

Thus understanding that Bruce Scott is not a Rhode Islander but a Floridian recently arrived from Rhode Island, we more clearly appreciate, through these equations, that the privileges and immunities secured by the Constitution … A blanket one-year durational residency requirement, however, clearly is not “closely tailored” to address the speculative evil new Floridians are alleged to pose.

Washington Public Employees Ass'n v. Personnel Resources Board

127 Wash. App. 254 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 26, 2005

The Civil Service Law established a new State Personnel Board and brought most general government employees under the Board’s control. … Moreover, if we are to compare members of the designated class with persons outside the class, it should not matter whether all members of the designated class are treated alike because a class of one qualifies for equal