Case law

Kristi Newbrough v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) · Oct 15, 2015

Brooks’s Immunity In her third issue, Newbrough argues that the trial court erred in not sua sponte granting immunity to Brooks after Brooks invoked her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and refused … Norman did not hold that the trial court has a sua sponte duty to grant immunity to a witness. Id.

Wilson v. Ridgway Area School District

141 Pa. Commw. 607 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 8, 1991

In this motion, District also asserted that it was immune based on Crowell v. … Summary judgment is only appropriate when, after examining the record in favor of the nonmoving party, there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant clearly establishes its entitlement to judgment as a matter

Bonus-Bilt, Inc. v. United Grocers, Ltd.

136 Cal. App. 3d 429 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 23, 1982

On the other hand, manufacturers’ liability clearly arises where plaintiff employee is injured in using a product designed and manufactured by his employer primarily for sale to the general public and only incidentally used … At the trial of the action the issue so specified shall be deemed established and the action shall proceed as to the issues remaining.

The State of Texas, by and Through the Office of the Attorney General of Texas v. City of San Marcos; Jane Hughson, Mayor of San Marcos; Matthew Mendoza, Saul Gonzales, Alyssa Garza, Shane Scott, Lorenzo Gonzalez, and Amanda Rodriguez, Members of the City Council of San Marcos; Stephanie Reyes, City Manager of San Marcos; And Stan Standridge, Chief of Police of San Marcos; In Their Official Capacities

Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District · Apr 17, 2025

Appellees asserted that governmental immunity shielded the City from suit and the individually named City Officials were protected by governmental immunity. … In re State, 2024 WL 2983176, at *4 (“Indeed, the violation of duly enacted state law by local government officials clearly inflicts irreparable harm on the State.”

Marshall v. Franklin Cty. Treasurer

2025 Ohio 1147 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 31, 2025

Because “that immunity is not absolute,” the second tier of the analysis asks “whether any of the five exceptions to immunity listed in R.C. 2744.02(B) apply to expose the political subdivision to liability.” … Marshall’s allegation of liability for the mailing of a tax bill clearly establishes appellees’ political subdivision immunity.

Wagner v. State Department of Health & Social Services

163 Wis. 2d 318 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · May 9, 1991

We conclude that Moriearty fails to establish he is immune from suit and that he has not established an unrebutted prima facie case that no such causal connection exists. We therefore reverse. … Moriearty has not established a prima facie defense of official immunity. 3 B.

Stone v. Police Department of Keyport

191 N.J. Super. 554 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 3, 1983

Plaintiff made the statement in a criminal proceeding to establish a factual basis for his guilty plea to an assault charge arising out of this incident. … We have carefully considered plaintiff’s remaining points and find that they are clearly without merit. R. 2:ll-3(e)(l)(E). Affirmed.

Thomas v. City of East Cleveland

61 Ohio App. 3d 75 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 16, 1989

The appellee merely relied upon the pleadings and attempted to establish as a matter of law that the appellants’ cause of action was barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. … Ill Conclusion Based upon the fact that the appellants’ complaint was not barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity and the failure of the appellee to establish that no genuine issues of material fact existed for the trier

Carroll v. Paddock

317 Ill. App. 3d 985 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 11, 2000

The Niehaus court held that the characteristics that make a not-for-profit corporation a charitable organization do not, without more, also qualify the corporation as a local public entity under the Act. … According to the Hospital, these detailed provisions clearly place its activities within the definition of public business. See 745 ILCS 10/6 — 101 through 6 — 110 (West 1998).

Schering-Plough Healthcare Products Sales Corp. v. Commonwealth

805 A.2d 1284 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 28, 2002

[P.L. 86-272] was designed to define clearly a lower limit for the exercise of that power. Clarity that would remove uncertainty was Congress’ primary goal. … First, as detailed above, Congress’ intent was to set a clearly lower limit of activity below which no business can be taxed. Wisconsin Dep’t of Revenue v.

Bullock v. Horn

720 A.2d 1079 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 17, 1998

and remain immune from suit except as the General Assembly shall specifically waive the immunity.” 1 Pa.C.S. § 2310. … Petitioner asserts that a directive of the Department of Corrections, DC-ADM 811, clearly mandates shoes or boots. . A prisoner is generally entitled to two hours of outdoor exercise, weather permitting.

Susan Combs, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts and the Office of the Comptroller of Public Accounts v. the Texas Civil Rights Project and Sarah Canright

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 29, 2013

immunity. … is on the government employee to establish all elements of the defense.

City of Weslaco v. Raquel Trejo and Roberto Trejo

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Jun 21, 2018

For the same reasons, we conclude that the Trejos have not established a waiver of immunity. … The Trejos’ motorized equipment theory does not establish a valid waiver of immunity. D.

Mta Lodge No. 34 v. Mta

195 Md. App. 124 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 30, 2010

First, we must clearly stake out the doctrinal terrain on which the parties battle. … That issue is not before us. [26] "[T]he General Assembly has the power to establish the terms under which it will permit a waiver of immunity...." Rios v.

Anderson v. Assimos

146 N.C. App. 339 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 2, 2001

App. 589, 593 , 284 S.E.2d 188, 191 (1981), modified on other grounds, 306 N.C. 364 , 293 S.E.2d 415 (1982), establish a statute of repose, Lamb, 308 N.C. at 444 , 302 S.E.2d at 882 , or establish limited immunities for some … A complaint alleging medical malpractice must: (1) specifically assert the complaint has been reviewed by a person “who is expected to qualify” or who the “complainant will seek to have qualified” as an expert witness under

Knight v. City of Capitola

4 Cal. App. 4th 918 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 17, 1992

Alternatively, to establish a complete defense the city argued that it was entitled to public-entity immunity under either Government Code section *926 831.7 (which provides immunity to public entities and employees against … Knight had noticed the deposition of state representatives most qualified to testify (cf. Code Civ. Proc., § 2025, subd.

Campbell v. City of Youngstown, 06 Ma 184 (12-31-2007)

2007 Ohio 7219 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 31, 2007

This type of evidence is insufficient to establish a genuine issue of material fact for the purposes of summary judgment. Accordingly, the trial court's decision is affirmed. … Campbell then contrasts these facts with those in this case by pointing out that her claim about lack of proper notice was raised in her initial complaint. {¶ 18} Campbell clearly shows that this case and Bram are not identical

Anderson v. Anoka Hennepin Independent School District 11

655 N.W.2d 847 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Jan 28, 2003

The supreme court disagreed, holding that the decision to spot the headspr-ing in the manner chosen clearly was a ministerial activity not entitled to immunity. Id. at 120 . … It is at least arguable that offering a Woods II class or establishing class curriculum that includes construction of a TV/ VCR cabinet is a policy-level decision entitled to statutory immunity.

County of Sacramento v. Superior Court

89 Cal. App. 3d 215 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 6, 1979

. *217 I We here set forth the facts as established both in support of and in opposition to the motion. … Such policy is clearly expressed by the Senate Legislative Committee comment accompanying section 831.2, and places the statute in unmistakable perspective.

National Cash Register Co. v. Modern Transfer Co.

224 Pa. Super. 138 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 27, 1973

The case law is well-established and without exception prorides that when no time is set for performance, a reasonable time must be allowed under the circumstances. … contract between the parties specifically precludes the recovery of such damages. 2 Appellant argues, however, that the fraudulent acts and inducements present herein should nullify a provision that makes the defrauding party immune