Case law

Damaschke v. City of Racine

150 Wis. 2d 279 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · Apr 26, 1989

First, we note the undisputed fact that the accumulation of snow which caused Damaschke's injuries was well within the three-week period of immunity. This aspect of the statute is clearly satisfied. … Case law has established that the accumulation of snow or ice must be natural and not one artificially created by the municipality in order for the three-week immunity of sec. 81.15, Stats., to apply. Kobelinski v.

Shepherd v. Costco

246 Ariz. 470 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Apr 30, 2019

Thus, Costco was not entitled to dismissal based on § 12-2296 immunity. … If all private causes of action were foreclosed, § 12-2296’s grant of qualified immunity would be superfluous. Thus, HIPAA does not preempt state-law negligence claims for wrongful disclosure of medical information.

Dubois County Bank v. City of Vincennes

517 N.E.2d 805 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jan 12, 1988

Both the act and the manual clearly make the decision to erect traffic signs, including warning signs, discretionary. … The manual and the IND.CODE establish only two instances wherein parking is prohibited for a minimum of 20 feet. In pertinent part, IND.

Bentler v. Commonwealth

143 Ky. 503 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · May 5, 1911

Appellant was interested in the *506 poker room, or gaming establishment at 23 Pike street, Covington, and was in fact, with Tomlin and perhaps others, operating for a profit or commission the gaming establishment there conducted … In deciding the case, the Supreme Court said: “We are clearly of the opinion that no statute which leaves the party subject to prosecution after he answers the criminating question put to him, can have the effect of supplanting

Johnson v. City of Philadelphia

93 Pa. Commw. 87 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 21, 1985

The petitioners contend that the facts alleged clearly place ¡them within one of the said exceptions which provides in pertinent part: *90 (b) Acts ¡which, may impose liability. — The following acts by a local agency or ¡ … (Attack at park, a city-owned and operated recreational facility did not establish a cause of action within real property exception.)

Syzygy Construction, LLC v. McKey

2014 La.App. 4 Cir. 745 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 10, 2014

Clearly, McKey presents nothing to dispute the fact that Mason had experience with SIP construction and that Syzygy was licensed to construct her home. … When the LLC statutes were enacted, “professional” had a clearly defined technical meaning within the law of business entities. See James S. Holliday, Jr., & H.

Fast Tract Framing, Inc. v. Caraballo

994 So. 2d 355 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 15, 2008

If this meaning is unambiguous "and conveys a clear and definite meaning, that meaning controls unless it leads to a result that is either unreasonable or clearly contrary to legislative intent." Id. … It seems to me that the effect of the decision is to immunize employers who elect to hire undocumented aliens. They will never have to pay for workplace injuries, because their employees are not receiving "wages."

Colbert v. Hollis

102 S.W.3d 445 · Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · Apr 14, 2003

We begin by determining whether Colbert conclusively established that he acted in good faith. … In making this determination, we look to “whether a reasonable official could have believed his or her conduct to be lawful in light of clearly established law and the information possessed by the official at the time of

Green v. Chicago Board of Education

407 Ill. App. 3d 721 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 22, 2011

Section 4—102 of the Act states, in relevant part: “Neither a local public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to establish a police department or otherwise provide police protection service or, if police protection … Section 4—102 of the Act does not contain the same qualifying language as section 3—108 of the Act.

Clemmons v. State

141 So. 2d 749 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 26, 1962

Clearly, the Coons case establishes no precedent as to the exercising of the power of contempt in a jurisdiction, such as ours, that has long recognized the independence of a grand jury by constitutional provisions and by … I therefore interpret the Brautigam decision as establishing the rule of law in Florida that a grand jury is not immune from punishment by contempt proceedings if it files a report containing scurrilous or defamatory statements

Taylor v. City of Los Angeles Department of Water & Power

51 Cal. Rptr. 3d 206 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 20, 2006

Relying on the statutory language the court held “individuals who *1237 do not themselves qualify as employers may not be sued under the FEHA for alleged discriminatory acts.” (Reno v. … immunity be withdrawn in the particular case.

Williams v. New York Herald Co.

165 A.D. 529 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 31, 1914

But the privilege which affords immunity against falsity of the matter published being limited to reports of judicial proceedings, has a newspaper a license to publish the contents of a complaint or answer prepared, served … Age-Herald Publishing Co., 181 Ala. 439 .) *532 The opinion thus generally held by the courts of this country commends itself to our judgment as establishing a safe and sound rule within the terms of our statute.

Hickey v. Huber

263 Ill. App. 3d 560 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 16, 1994

Claiming sovereign immunity, Huber moved for summary judgment. … Huber’s and Morrison’s testimony clearly established that they were pursuing the green car. For these reasons, no jury determination on this issue is warranted. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed. Affirmed.

Williams v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.

448 So. 2d 68 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 10, 1984

purportedly "sublet" work of carrying baggage was, at best, but a small, surely not indispensable portion and was thus, to use the legal term of art, merely "incidental" to the essence of the "prime contracts" — which was clearly … 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

Amarillo 'Dillas Baseball Club, LLC v. Potter County, Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo) · Oct 11, 2012

According to the Dillas, this sentence clearly establishes permission to file suit. … This last part of the statute clearly implicates the presentment condition precedent contained in subparagraph (a).

Guarrasi v. Scott

25 A.3d 394 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 21, 2011

Financial records of the Unified Judicial System are presumed to be open to any member of the public for inspection or copying during established business hours. … Further judicial immunity is not only immunity from damages, but also immunity from suit. Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9 , 112 S.Ct. 286 , 116 L.Ed.2d 9 (1991).

City of Houston, Texas v. Chelsea Manning, Individually and as Next Friend of T.N. Aaliyah Mitchell, and Cierra Williams

Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Mar 7, 2024

Because official immunity is an affirmative defense, the burden rests on the City to establish all elements of the defense. See Gomez, 587 S.W.3d at 897. … Negligence per se In its fourth issue, the City argues that the TTCA does not clearly and unequivocally waive immunity for claims based upon negligence per se. 15  “

Romero v. State

112 N.M. 291 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Jun 5, 1991

Ferraro was qualified to give an expert opinion on the cause of the accident. III. … Section 41-4-4(A) establishes governmental immunity from tort liability except as waived under the Act.

Nelson v. Quarles and Brady, LLP

2013 IL App (1st) 123122 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 21, 2013

This result, plaintiff contends, would have made Curia a majority owner and was “clearly contrary to the terms of the option.” … In doing so, we cannot say that it clearly appears that no set of facts could be proved which would entitle plaintiff to recover.

Williams v. City of New York

129 A.D.3d 1066 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 24, 2015

“If found to be objectively reasonable, the officer’s actions are privileged under the doctrine of qualified immunity” (Lepore v Town of Greenburgh, 120 AD3d at 1203 ; see Holland v City of Poughkeepsie, 90 AD3d at 844 ; … Here, the officers’ deposition testimony established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the first cause of action, which was predicated upon an alleged use of excessive force, insofar