Case law

Peisner v. Detroit Free Press, Inc.

82 Mich. App. 153 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 21, 1978

The first expression of the qualified privilege doctrine appears in Bacon v Michigan Central R Co, 66 Mich 166, 170 ; 33 NW 181 (1887): "Qualified privilege exists in a much larger number of cases. … -it the other extreme are those occasions wherein the social interest involved in publication is so great as . to immunize even deliberately malicious attacks upon one’s character.

reynolds v. state

Vermont Superior Court · Feb 15, 2024

Under that provision, to be qualified to seek damages, one must already have been: (1) exonerated, (2) pursuant to, (3) this chapter. … This “chapter” clearly refers to the entirety of the Act, Chapter 182 of Title 13.

Mark and Rhonda Lesher v. Shannon and Gerald Coyel and Val Varley

435 S.W.3d 423 · Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · Jun 16, 2014

The Leshers contend Varley did not establish that he was entitled to absolute immunity. They also assert Varley’s conduct was in the clear absence of all jurisdiction and was thus unprotected. … The Leshers first contend Varley did not establish he was entitled to absolute immunity.

Burns v. Mayor of Rockville

71 Md. App. 293 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 11, 1987

They assure us that since municipal immunity was established by judicial decision rather than by the General Assembly, this Court possesses the authority to accomplish their request. We do not accede to their request. … The provisions of Art. 28, § 2-111, which the Court construed, provided: "(a) Establishment; purposes. — The Commission shall establish an adequate comprehensive insurance program: (1) To compensate for injury to or death

Stephens v. Dunn

453 S.W.3d 241 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jan 14, 2014

Stephens’ statement confuses the parties’ burdens as the Missouri Supreme Court is clear the burden is on the plaintiff to allege facts establishing that an exception to the official immunity doctrine applies. … Stephens clearly had an “opportunity to conduct discovery” and plenty of time to do so.

Texas Parks & Wildlife Department v. Callaway

971 S.W.2d 145 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jun 11, 1998

Clearly, one purpose of Callaway’s suit is to establish the validity of the rights and obligations granted in the easement. … Since Callaway primarily seeks money damages, his request for declaratory judgment does not fit under the exception to sovereign immunity established in Cobb .

Lascio v. Belcher Roofing Corp.

704 A.2d 642 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 30, 1997

Its purpose is to protect employees by establishing quick and certain compensation for work-related injuries and resultant loss of earnings without wasting *645 time and expenses on litigation. Wagner v. … Fairly read, this argument is actually an attack on Barclay-White’s ability to meet the first element of the statutory employer defense, specifically, whether Barclay-White qualifies as “an employer” with respect to Samuel

Pacific Great Lakes Corp. v. Bessemer & Lake Erie Railroad

130 Ohio App. 3d 477 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 9, 1998

The record shows that Cleveland Stevedore proposed various instructions, objected to certain instructions given, and did not clearly approve of the trial court’s final instructions. … Good clearly possessed some knowledge of the particular subject superior to that possessed by ordinary jurors. Without showing any greater knowledge, Cleveland Stevedore’s expert, Dr.

Fullerton v. FLORIDA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, INC.

938 So. 2d 587 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 27, 2006

no immunity to the defendants. … A reading of the above provisions clearly reveals two essential requisites must be met in order for a professional-review body to be entitled to the immunity authorized: (1) the body must be engaged in a professional-review

Duran v. Buckner

157 So. 3d 956 · Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · Jun 27, 2014

and failure to establish policies and procedures. … Floyd, 667 So.2d 56, 64 (Ala.1995), for the proposition that “ ‘[t]he question whether a public official is entitled to qualified immunity is one to be decided as a matter of law.’ ”). 6 Our supreme court has set forth a

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.

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.

Messick v. Catawba County, NC

110 N.C. App. 707 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 6, 1993

Clearly, the Commissioners, as sued in their official capacities, are immune from the plaintiff’s suit. … Clearly, the sheriff in the instant case is immune from suit in his individual capacity from the plaintiff’s causes of action in negligence and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

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.

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.”

Crew v. Advics Mfg. Ohio, Inc.

2020 Ohio 328 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 3, 2020

Crew further argued that summary judgment was inappropriate as AMO failed to establish it had paid premiums into the state insurance fund to provide coverage for Crew, thereby denying it the right to immunity under Ohio's … "A customer of a staffing agency may pay the workers' compensation premiums either directly or indirectly to qualify for immunity under R.C. 4123.74." Id., citing Foran v.

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.