Case law

Jones v. Town of Woodworth

15 La.App. 3 Cir. 568 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 4, 2015

JONES, SR.” ' The Town of Woodworth and Officer Sikes had also plead in their “Answer To Plaintiff’s Petition for Damages,” the affirmative defense of qualified immunity pursuant to La.R.S. 9:2798.1, La.R.S. 9:2800-2800.52 … A panel of our court decided to review the case on appeal under a duty/risk analysis pursuant to La,Civ.Code art. 2315, rather than apply the analysis applicable to statutory qualified immunity.

Plush v. Cincinnati

164 N.E.3d 1056 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 16, 2020

Therefore, the second characteristic of the physical-defect exception cannot be established. {¶32} Because the Plushes cannot establish the second characteristic, the immunity exception contained in R.C. 2744.02 … Clearly, as alleged in the complaint, this conduct was negligent. Especially when considering that the officers were listening to music and were eating during the search.

Jackson County Hosp. Corp. v. Aldrich

835 So. 2d 318 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 27, 2002

Because section 768.13(2)(b)1. clearly and unambiguously immunizes only hospitals licensed under chapter 395, employees of such hospitals working in a clinical area within the facility, and physicians, we are bound to follow … Even without this question being asked, the jury clearly could reasonably infer that Dr.

State v. Tanner

2020 Ohio 5413 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 25, 2020

. {¶ 8} This Court has noted: The established standard of review for felony sentences is codified in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2). State v. … Government is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter, reform, or abolish the same, whenever they may deem it necessary; and no special privileges or immunities shall

Slosberg v. Municipal Court

101 Cal. App. 2d 238 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 1950

It is possible, though it does not clearly appear, that some of the same property may be included in both; but whether or not that is so, it is clear that both actions involve the general subject of property of the decedent—each … The rule before us is not established by statute, thus requiring construction of specific words, but by the courts themselves as a matter of public policy.

Felder v. King Motor Co. of South Florida

110 So. 3d 105 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 20, 2013

For these reasons, King Motor is entitled to immunity from this suit under the Florida Workers’ Compensation Act, and this action is barred by Section 440.11, Fla. Stat. … Therefore, it would be clear error for this court to find such ambiguity as a basis for inferring a legislative intent contrary to the clearly expressed language of the statute.

Rainey v. Entergy Gulf States, Inc.

993 So. 2d 735 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 15, 2008

R.S. 23:1032. [1] Because Entergy seeks to avail itself of tort immunity under La. R.S. 23:1032, Entergy bears the burden of proving entitlement to the immunity. Weber v. … Because an Entergy representative did not physically sign the addendum at issue, plaintiffs urge that Entergy did not meet the statutory requirements to qualify as Rainey's statutory employer.

Bohrer v. County of San Diego

104 Cal. App. 3d 155 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 2, 1980

Absent a special statute, there is no authority for the court to take judicial notice of a conclusion of suicide from a governmental document to establish the cause of death (Thinguldstad v. … The standards set forth by the first two elements clearly preclude the plaintiff from any inclusion within the zone of forseeability.

Chemical Bank v. National Union Fire Ins.

70 A.D.2d 837 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 26, 1979

We are satisfied that defendant failed to sustain its burden of establishing the privileged character of the documents (Koump v Smith, 25 NY2d 287 ), and the order accordingly is reversed. … As to such documents when developed prior to litigation, the rule is: "Multi-motived reports do not warrant the immunity if litigation is but one of the motives.”

Walker v. Mid-States Terminal, Inc.

17 Ohio App. 3d 19 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 9, 1984

That the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Stout for the reason that the evidence presented established the applicability of the dual-capacity exception to employer immunity under the Workers’ Compensation … The writing judge, however, believes that the evidence presented clearly established that Stout 'committed an intentional tort against' appellarfts through the conduct of its supervisory personnel and that no genuine issue

Ness v. Glasscock

13 Brief Times Rptr. 638 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Jun 1, 1989

He argues that he had clearly established rights under existing law. We agree. Under Harlow v. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), there is a qualified immunity for public officials performing discretionary acts.

Robinson v. Brannon

313 S.W.3d 860 · Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · May 20, 2010

Accordingly, immunity afforded by this statute requires that the person asserting immunity establish that (1) he or she is a professional employee of a school district, (2) he or she is acting incident to or within the scope … Section 22.0517 clearly provides that “the employee (party) is entitled to recover” if he or she is found to be immune from liability. See id.

Texas Adjutant General's Office v. Michele Ngakoue

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Apr 29, 2011

the Act when it is filed, not when waiver of immunity by the Act is established"). … Moreover, subsection 101.106(f) makes no reference to subsection 101.106(b) or otherwise suggests that it is an exception to the permanent immunity established under subsection 101.106(b).

Batmasian v. Ballachino

755 So. 2d 157 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 1, 2000

Cohen, 287 So.2d 56, 59 (Fla.1973) (“By granting the owners immunity from third-party tort suit, merely because ‘they were acting in concert with the general contractor,’ the ... … contract work to a subcontractor or subcontractors, all of the employees of such contractor and subcontractor or subcontractors engaged on such contract work shall be deemed to be employed in one and the same business or establishment

Petroleum Traders Corp. v. State

190 N.C. App. 542 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 20, 2008

Defendants assert that the Declaratory Judgment Act does not waive sovereign immunity, and Plaintiff concedes that it “has not relied on the Declaratory Judgment Act to establish the absence of sovereign immunity.” … We agree, and conclude that the waiver of sovereign immunity established by Corum does not extend to Count I or II of Plaintiff’s complaint.

Holliday v. Regional Transportation District

2001 Colo. J. C.A.R. 4723 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Sep 27, 2001

Qualified immunity is generally available to government officials in the exercise of discretionary functions, but does not apply when an official violates clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … When, as here, guiding and controlling principles of the First Amendment are clearly established, a government official will not be protected by qualified immunity for acts that the official would be expected to know violate

Orange Stones Co. v. City of Reading

87 A.3d 1014 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 2014

First, a party may raise the affirmative defense of immunity as a preliminary objection where it is clearly applicable on the face of the complaint; that is, that a cause of action is made against a governmental body and … In and of themselves, these averments are markedly insufficient to establish that Lachat possessed the wrongful intent necessary to overcome the official/governmental immunity conferred to him by the Tort Claims Act.

Rhiver v. Rietman

148 Ind. App. 266 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Dec 28, 1970

Immunity is a central consideration to this noble goal. … We think the examining physician’s privilege from civil liability may be qualified where malpractice is demonstrated.

Bostic Packaging, Inc. v. City of Monroe

149 N.C. App. 825 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 16, 2002

The Court stated that the “establishment and construction of a sewer system by a municipality are governmental functions entitling it to immunity from negligence.” Id. at 610 , 261 S.E.2d at 300-01 . … immunity.

State v. Lindner

227 Ariz. 69 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Sep 28, 2010

The person challenging the statute bears the burden of establishing its invalidity. … using an approved breath testing device, by a qualified operator, using certain procedures, and that the device was in proper operating condition.