Case law

The ARDENT COMPANIES, LLC v. CITY OF BROOKHAVEN

Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jun 30, 2025

The city manager also disclosed to Ardent that the City intended to contact the six homeowners to establish purchase options should Ardent’s contracts on those homes expire. … (citations and punctuation omitted). 6  Under Georgia law, official or qualified immunity is an entitlement not to stand trial rather than a mere defense to

McCarroll v. Town of E. Haven

180 Conn. App. 515 · Connecticut Appellate Court · Mar 27, 2018

‘‘The essential elements of a cause of action in negligence are well established: duty; breach of that duty; causation; and actual injury. . . . … The court stated that ‘‘[§] 52-557n abandons the common- law principle of municipal sovereign immunity and establishes the circumstances in which a municipality may be liable for damages. . . .

Tomei v. Sharp

902 A.2d 757 · Superior Court of Delaware · May 25, 2006

This acts as a waiver. 23 The General Assembly has, therefore, clearly evidenced an intent that the State not enjoy immunity as to the violations specified in the Whistleblower Act. 24 The State, however, argues that it is … My duties include administration of insurance coverage in all instances in which the State has waived sovereign immunity by establishing a State Insurance Coverage Program pursuant to 18 Del.C. § 6501. 3.

Lacey v. Horan

119 A.D.2d 806 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 28, 1986

Lastly, we note that the doctrine of qualified governmental immunity enunciated in Weiss v Fote (supra), is not a basis for granting summary judgment to the county, as there are clearly factual disputes as to whether or not

Melendez v. City of New York

109 A.D.2d 13 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 4, 1985

It was established to secure to the subject a right to appeal to his peers, under the immunity of secrecy and irresponsibility, before the government could bring him to trial. … Clearly, disclosure of Grand Jury testimony is not needed to establish the charge that the City failed to properly train and teach its police officers or that there was negligence in the hiring or retention of Medina.

Fagan v. Jackson County Hospital District, Jackson Hospital

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 14, 2024

Although conceding he did not notify DFS within that time limit, Appellant argues instead that, because chapter 766 establishes presuit investigation requirements that apply to claims against both non-immune defendants and … Contrary to Appellant’s argument, the court there clearly distinguished between the two statutory schemes.

Susan Combs, in Her Official Capacity as Comptroller of Public Accounts for the State of Texas v. City of Webster, Webster Economic Development Corporation, City of Denton, City of Humble, City of Lewisville, City of Mesquite, City of North Richland Hills, City of Plano, City of Waco, Denton County Transportation Authority

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Oct 2, 2009

This portion of the definition is not qualified or conditional in any way on the portion of the definition referring to a retailer's "purpose" for the location. … Appellees contend that the RoomStore warehouse does not qualify under the Comptroller's own guidelines.

Tiller v. University of Kentucky

55 S.W.3d 846 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Feb 16, 2001

Clearly, therefore, Tiller’s status as an “unwed mother” is sufficiently within the statutory definition to afford coverage, assuming the requisite burden of proof can be met. … Lastly, the University argued that Tiller’s claims were barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

Daniel v. City of Colorado Springs

328 P.3d 234 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Oct 11, 2012

An appellate court will not disturb the trial court's jurisdictional factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous. Springer v. City & Cnty. of Denver, 13 P.3d 794, 799 (Colo.2000). … her argument regarding section 24-10-106(1)(e), she "requests the Court set a factual hearing to determine if additional subsections of C.R.S. 24-10-106 apply." 119 We conclude that plaintiff failed to meet her burden to establish

Department of Transportation v. Price

208 Ga. App. 320 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Mar 8, 1993

deposition and discovery on such question to supplement the record therewith during the pendency of this appeal in this court and while the trial court was without jurisdiction to proceed in such manner, as is very well established … But clearly the county was not liable in Christian (and thus DOT was not liable on the county’s behalf), not because the county did not build that road, but because the county had purchased no liability insurance and thus

Grinnell v. Charles Pfizer & Co.

274 Cal. App. 2d 424 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 30, 1969

Defendant now especially urges that the testimony of these doctors must be disregarded on the question of causation because neither man was a qualified epidemiologist. 9 There is no merit in this proposition since the qualifications … The language of the insert can clearly be construed as an affirmation of fact.

Castillo v. Huell

675 So. 2d 180 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 15, 1996

This ride was part of a company-established transportation system which ensured that its employees who had limited means of transportation would be able to get to the job sites. … We omit the facts relating to the claims for gross and culpable negligence as they clearly are insufficient to avoid the immunity. . With one exception.

Murray v. Univ. of N.C. at Chapel Hill

246 N.C. App. 86 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 1, 2016

Defense counsel clearly argues that plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim by “neither alleg[ing] a waiver of immunity nor demonstrat[ing] the basis for such a waiver.” … The record clearly shows defendant raised sovereign immunity at the hearing under Rule 12(b)(6). This issue is properly before this Court.

Eugene Moore and Wanda Wagner v. City of O'Fallon, Missouri

Missouri Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 2023

As the Pursuit Policy clearly states, “[t]he responsibility for the decision to initiate a pursuit rests with the individual officer.” … Additionally, Plaintiffs contend that neither official immunity nor the public duty doctrine should protect the Officers against a claim of recklessness because “Missouri courts have clearly held that the doctrines . .

ABIEGALE ROGERS, AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF SONNY ROGERS v. HHRM SELF-PERFORM, LLC

Court of Appeals of Georgia · Oct 31, 2022

“Broadly, there is a joint venture when two or more combine their property or labor, or both, in a joint undertaking for profit, with rights of mutual control, provided the arrangement does not establish a partnership. … When the Supreme Court has addressed an issue in clear terms, this Court is not at liberty to decline to follow the established rule of law.

McKinney v. City of Philadelphia

123 Pa. Commw. 144 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 26, 1989

Questions presented are essentially whether governmental immunity under the Judicial Code, 42 Pa. C. … The instant record clearly demonstrates that the order from which the City appealed is interlocutory in nature and that the City has failed to otherwise establish its appealability.

Grostick v. Ellsworth

158 Mich. App. 18 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 18, 1987

malice to overcome the qualified privilege. … "Generally speaking, absolute privilege is confined to cases in which the public service or the administration of justice requires complete immunity from being called to account for language used.

Klumb v. Houston Municipal Employees Pension System

405 S.W.3d 204 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 23, 2013

Article 6243h of the Texas Revised Civil Statutes established HMEPS. See Tex.Rev.Civ. Stat. … To qualify as a “governmental plan” under 26 U.S.C. § 401 (a), the plan must be established and maintained for the employees of a political subdivision of a state or its agencies or instrumentalities.

Collins v. City of Meriden

41 Conn. Super. Ct. 425 · Connecticut Superior Court · Jul 30, 1990

“It is well established that the state is immune from suit unless it consents to be sued by appropriate legislation waiving sovereign immunity in certain prescribed cases.” Duguay v. … “[B]ecause the state has permitted itself to be sued in certain circumstances, [however, it is a] . . . well established principle that statutes in derogation of sovereign immunity should be strictly construed. . . .

S. Brewington v. City of Philadelphia and Walter G. Smith Elementary School -- Appeal of: S. Brewington and J. Brewington

149 A.3d 901 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 14, 2016

It is anciently established that consideration of the intention of an owner regarding whether a chattel has been permanently placed on real property is relevant only where the … The plaintiff was injured when she struck the hardwood floor, which is clearly not personalty.