Case law

Charles G. Rawls v. Woodville ISD, Lisa Meysembourg, and Donece Gregory

Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) · Aug 31, 2022

According to WISD and Meysembourg, they should be dismissed from Rawls’s suit because they are entitled to governmental and qualified immunity, respectively. See Bielamowicz v. Cedar Hill Indep. Sch. … According to Rawls, the evidence was sufficient to establish that they were proper parties to sue in this election contest and not protected by sovereign immunity.

Waslow v. Pennsylvania Department of Education

984 A.2d 575 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 2009

Einstein alleged that, as a result, it was unable to timely provide the IEPs required by law for Einstein’s qualifying special education students. (Petition, ¶¶ 6, 20-21.) … , immunities, duties, liabilities, or obligations.

Albritton v. Gandy

531 So. 2d 381 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 13, 1988

He further testified that he was aware of nothing in Gandy's background that would have made her not qualified to continue working as a relief EMT. … Clearly such a result is contrary to the Florida Supreme Court's directive that punitive damages may not be assessed in an amount which will clearly bankrupt or destroy a defendant. Arab Termite and Pest Control v.

Mims v. Clanton

222 Ga. App. 657 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Aug 15, 1996

“The Board of Commissioners failed to take any affirmative action to propose, endorse, ratify, or establish a fund to pay claims prior to or on the date of the subject incident. … Clearly Gwinnett County created a self-insurance plan which came within the constitutional provision. Logue v.

People v. Lee

88 Ill. App. 3d 396 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 17, 1980

The Coleman decision has been followed by courts of Rhode Island, Wisconsin, North Dakota, and Michigan, which courts have established either use immunity or exclusionary rules for testimony given by a probationer at a revocation … The California Supreme Court in Coleman, and those courts of other States who have established either use immunity or exclusionary rules in situations such as the one presented in this case, have refused to base their decisions

Rose v. Cardinal Industries, Inc.

68 Ohio App. 3d 406 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 1990

Appellants argued further that, under the statute, notice of the defect was not required and, even if there was a notice requirement, the record clearly established that appellee had notice based on the fact that the caretaker … The Damas court, however, clearly stated its refusal to extend the provisions of R.C. 5321.04 to guests of tenants and did not qualify that decision based upon the fact that the case dealt with natural accumulations of snow

Cornell v. City and County of San Francisco

California Court of Appeal · Nov 21, 2017

By then, appellants contend, the jury’s findings establish without doubt that Cornell was in full flight, clearly indicating consciousness of guilt. … (b), the federal standard for qualified immunity that has evolved in the last three decades, which is based on an objective appraisal of whether an officer facing civil suit violated “clearly established” law, and is not

Noris Rogers v. Houston Community College

Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Mar 9, 2023

governmental immunity. … (concluding policies and procedures clearly indicated that employment was at-will and there was no evidence showing employment was anything but “at-will” to waive governmental immunity).

Edoho v. Board of Curators of Lincoln University

344 S.W.3d 794 · Missouri Court of Appeals · May 17, 2011

When an affirmative defense, such as the statute of limitations, is asserted in a motion to dismiss, however, the petition may not be dismissed unless it clearly establishes “ ‘on its face and without exception’ ” that it … Edoho’s petition did not show that Lincoln University had not established constitutionally adequate safeguards and was, thus, an agency for purposes of the MAPA.

Carr v. City of Newport Beach

California Court of Appeal · Aug 29, 2023

The dissent interprets the latter half of the diving provision to qualify a public entity’s immunity if it chooses to prohibit diving at a particular location. … Public entities are immune from liability for injuries arising from a failure to enforce the law (§ 818.2), meaning this is not a viable basis for establishing gross negligence. (See Wood v.

James Allen Walker, Jr. v. City of Brady and Richard L. Cory

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 12, 1992

The statute clearly contemplates that an individual receive notice before any disciplinary action is taken. The facts fail to establish that the City complied with the statutory requirements before demoting Walker. … Section 37.009 contains no express or implied waiver of sovereign immunity. Id . We reject Walker's assertion that sovereign immunity is waived in declaratory judgment actions.

Florida Virtual School v. Courtney Calfee

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 26, 2025

should be established as early in the litigation as possible.” … FVS, which was “established for the development and delivery of online and distance learning education,” is governed by its board of trustees—a “public agency entitled to sovereign immunity pursuant to [section] 768.28[

Estate of Finley v. Cleveland Metroparks

189 Ohio App. 3d 139 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 26, 2010

Clearly, if the tree was located on city property, the Metroparks would have no duty to maintain the tree. … Furthermore, this court finds that transportation via motorcycle-vehicle does not establish exclusively recreational activity.”

Lucero v. Salazar

117 N.M. 803 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · May 11, 1994

established, and the right is not absolute or unqualified.”). … To establish who was a foreseeable plaintiff in situations where negligent infliction of emotional distress was alleged, Ramirez established the following criteria: 1.

Ross v. San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District

53 Cal. Rptr. 3d 715 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 24, 2007

his age in violation of FEHA (second cause of action) by (1) punishing him for acts and omissions that were not punished when committed by younger workers in the same category; (2) filling his position with younger, less qualified … Montoya (1995) 10 Cal.4th 972 [42 Cal.Rptr.2d *1514 842, 897 P.2d 1320 ] (Caldwell), section 815 establishes “the basic rule[] that public entities are immune from liability except as provided by statute.”

American Bible Society v. Lewisohn

48 A.D.2d 308 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 12, 1975

We find that the record clearly establishes that petitioner is not organized exclusively "for religious, charitable * * * educational, moral or mental improvement * * * purposes, but * * * is organized * * * exclusively for … note, that even to the extent that petitioner’s activities are religious within the meaning of the constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion, such, nevertheless, does not mean that petitioner’s property is therefore immune

Barnes v. State

576 So. 2d 758 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 22, 1991

Nothing in the statutory language of the 1988 or 1989 amendments to section 775.084 clearly and unambiguously demonstrates any legislative *765 intent to change these established legal principles governing the construction … or other qualified offenses."

The City of El Paso, Texas v. R.K.

Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) · Jul 18, 2025

Accordingly, a plaintiff survives such a plea only by showing that a statute “clearly and affirmatively waive[s] immunity” and “negating any provisions that create exceptions to, and 4 While “sovereign immunity” protects … If the plaintiff’s allegations neither establish nor negate jurisdiction, it should be given an opportunity to amend its pleadings; but if the plaintiff’s allegations negate jurisdiction, it cannot establish jurisdiction

Warren v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections

151 Pa. Commw. 46 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 7, 1992

remedies and to allege facts showing conditions of imprisonment rising to the level of cruel and unusual punishment. 3 Preliminary objections may be sustained where, as a matter of law, the petition for review does not establish … Consequently, to be amenable to suit under section 1983, the Department and Frackville must qualify as persons within the intendment of section 1983. In Will v.

McCord v. Memorial Medical Center Hospital

750 S.W.2d 362 · Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · May 5, 1988

This affidavit is sufficient to establish that MMC is a political subdivision of the state of Texas. Tex.R.Civ.P. 166a. … The Tort Claims Act clearly prohibits governmental liability for intentional torts. Townsend, 529 S.W.2d at 267 .