Case law

Diaz v. Canutillo Independent School District

311 S.W.3d 588 · Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) · Feb 3, 2010

Thus, CISD is immune from suit unless the Tort Claims Act expressly waives immunity. … Employers is clearly distinguishable because it did not involve the Tort Claims Act.

Richardson v. Warren Consolidated School District

197 Mich. App. 697 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 29, 1992

"No action may be maintained under the highway exception unless it is clearly within the scope and meaning of the statute.” … This Court has not extended municipal liability beyond that "clearly within the scope and meaning of the statute.” Scheurman, supra at 630 .

Cornell v. City and County of San Francisco

California Court of Appeal · Nov 16, 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

ALABAMA DEM v. Town of Lowndesboro

950 So. 2d 1180 · Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · Apr 8, 2005

Lyles , 797 So.2d 432 , 435 (Ala. 2001), quoting in turn other cases)). 4 It is well established that state immunity under § 14 extends to state agencies. … Clearly, a ruling in her favor could ultimately `touch' the state treasury by requiring the disbursement of state funds. For this reason, we find that § 14 bars this action."

Texas Logos, L.P. v. Texas Department of Transportation

241 S.W.3d 105 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 30, 2007

City of Mexia, 197 S.W.3d 325, 331-32 (Tex.2006) (sovereign immunity “remains firmly established, and as it has come to be applied to the various governmental entities in this State, an important purpose is pragmatic: to … An otherwise-proper declaratory claim alleging statutory violations may nonetheless have the effect of establishing a right to a remedy that is barred by sovereign immunity.

Sammy Tawakkol v. Sheila Vasquez, in Her Official Capacity as Manager of the Texas Department of Public Safety- Sex Offender Registration Bureau; And Freeman F. Martin, in His Official Capacity as Director of the Texas Department of Public Safety

Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District · May 12, 2025

City of Houston, 487 S.W.3d 154, 158 (Tex. 2016). 19 federal sovereign immunity does not necessarily establish that Plaintiff’s state-law claims are also barred by Texas’ sovereign … immunity doctrine.

Vitale v. Reddy

150 Mich. App. 492 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 8, 1986

Reddy should have recognized Michael’s serious condition earlier than she did and should have ordered him to be transferred sooner to a qualified hospital for prompt diagnosis and treatment. … The state is therefore protected by governmental immunity. As to Dr.

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority v. Superior Court

20 Cal. Rptr. 3d 92 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 21, 2004

While there are no cases directly on the issue of public entity immunity from civil penalties under the Unruh Act, there are several instructive decisions which discuss the immunity provided by section 818 in other civil … But even after establishing a case where punitive damages are permissible, he is never entitled to them ....

City of Sunland Park v. Paseo Del Norte Ltd. Partnership

128 N.M. 163 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Sep 3, 1999

PDN contends that the collateral-order doctrine applies to the State’s claim of immunity from condemnation proceedings because the doctrine applies to all official claims of immunity. This contention is incorrect. … The doctrine permits immediate appeals only for claims of qualified immunity by public officials sued for damages in their individual capacities. See Doe v. Leach, 1999-NMCA-117, ¶¶ 9-12 , 128 N.M. 28 , 988 P.2d 1252 .

Burkes v. Stidham

107 Ohio App. 3d 363 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 13, 1995

A qualified privilege is applied to situations of intermediate importance. The immunity is conditioned upon publication in a reasonable manner and for a proper purpose. … Appellants argue that Adrine failed to establish a defense of qualified privilege.

Hupf v. City of Appleton

165 Wis. 2d 215 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · Oct 22, 1991

In pursuit of summary judgment, the moving party has the burden to establish the absence of a genuine issue as to any material fact. Id. … We therefore require that the contract clearly express the intent of the parties so that with the surrounding circumstances, it is clear the parties knowingly agreed to excuse the otherwise responsible party. Id.

Irion v. State Ex Rel. DOTD

760 So. 2d 1220 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 12, 2000

is clearly wrong. … Moreover, I find that the record evidence clearly establishes that the sole legal cause of this accident was Mr. Irion's negligent operation of his vehicle.

City of San Antonio v. Texas Mutual Insurance Company as Subrogee of Fernando Hernandez

Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · Jan 14, 2009

The City’s knowledge that deteriorating conditions below the surface might at some time in the future result in a sinkhole is insufficient to establish waiver of immunity. See id. … The law clearly requires the sinkhole to have developed and the City to be aware of its existence.

Schmidt v. United Order of Foresters

124 Mo. App. 165 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 2, 1907

This is on the ground that it cannot reasonably be supposed, unless so stated or clearly implied, that either the member or the company intended to provide for the enactment of a by-law which would destroy the substantial … itself to write fraternal insurance, must remain always inactive even though, before a los» occurs, the society does qualify itself.

People v. Windus

165 Cal. App. 4th 634 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 30, 2008

Eidleman’s recommendation was more than three years old, it “had clearly expired.” … Galambos (2002) 104 Cal.App.4th 1147, 1152 [ 128 Cal.Rptr.2d 844 ] [“We also reject defendant’s claim that the limited immunity afforded under Proposition 215 to patients and primary caregivers should be extended to those

Poole Truck Line, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Transportation Cabinet/Department of Highways Ex Rel. Kelly

892 S.W.2d 611 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Feb 10, 1995

It is a well established rule of statutory construction that all words and phrases of a statute are to be construed according to common and approved usage of language, with a view to promote their objects. … This section of the Board of Claims Act clearly provides that the General Assembly intends waiver of immunity only in limited situations.

Laredo Police Officer Ruben Nunez, in His Official Capacity and Individually v. Idalia Jimenez

Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · Dec 12, 2007

Defamation To establish his defense of official immunity for the defamation claim, Officer Nunez relies on the same evidence used to establish his immunity defense for the false arrest claim. … Those statements include facts relating to both the injury to a child and the child endangerment offenses. (4) The evidence clearly establishes Officer Nunez was acting within the scope of his authority and performing discretionary

First Bank & Trust v. Maynahonah

313 P.3d 1044 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 14, 2013

It observed that no resolutions of the Board established generally applicable tribal ageney principles. … Those cases clearly do not stand for the proposition that no action "by any tribal entity" 29 is needed to confer authority upon another to waive the Tribe's immunity.

Sanders v. City of Chicago

306 Ill. App. 3d 356 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 30, 1999

Our holding is not meant to establish a rule that an officer necessarily must be engaged in an emergency response in order for section 2 — 202 immunity to apply. … App. 3d 241 (1989)) are immunized.

Neher v. Chartier

124 Or. App. 220 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 3, 1993

responsible for harm qualifying as a legal injury remain liable. … Defendants counter that the protection of Article I, section 10, applies only to rights established at common law, see Stewart v.