Case law

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.

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).

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.

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

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.

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

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 . . .”).

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

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.

Jesse Diaz v. City of Elsa, Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Mar 8, 2018

Section 271.152 of the local government code waives immunity to suit for qualifying local governmental entities for purposes of adjudicating a claim for breach of contract entered into by the local governmental entity. … (defining a “contract” for purposes of waiving immunity under this subchapter)). The parties in this case solely focus on whether Diaz can establish the third element for waiver to apply under section 271.152.

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.”

Holloway v. Dougherty County School System

157 Ga. App. 251 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jan 8, 1981

Thus, rather than an express statutory waiver of the sovereign immunity of the County School System, there is an express reservation of immunity from suits in tort. … In the instant case, the acts and omissions complained of — installation, maintenance and supervision of the *254 water fountains on school premises — are clearly, under Hennessy , “discretionary.”

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

Wagman v. Bradshaw

292 A.D.2d 84 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 18, 2002

The rule clearly bars a healthcare provider’s written report which interprets the results of a medical test from receipt in evidence. In Schozer v William Penn Life Ins. Co. of N.Y. … The danger and unfairness of permitting an expert to testify as to the contents of inadmissible out-of-court material is that the testimony is immune to contradiction.

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.

Barr v. Cutler

64 Ill. App. 3d 518 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 6, 1978

The failure on the part of the lessor to qualify the word “fire” indicates an intent on his part. Additionally, damage due to “other inevitable accidents” remains unspecified, while fire is specifically mentioned. … In addition, society’s interests are met in part by the establishment of definite rules which enable individuals and businesses to allocate the risks of foreseeable losses.