Case law

People v. Clemmons

208 Cal. App. 2d 696 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 19, 1962

The witness was granted immunity under section 1324 of the Penal Code and was advised by both her counsel and the court that she would have complete immunity from prosecution. Again, she refused to testify. … Defendant next contends the prosecution did not establish the actual commission of the offense by defendant by substantial testimony.

People v. McIntosh

142 Mich. App. 314 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 6, 1985

Prior to trial, the court held an evidentiary hearing to establish the basis of Faulkner’s testimony. … Kelly Faulkner was vigorously cross-examined about the effects of the hypnosis and the tentative nature of her identification of defendant at the lineup was clearly established.

Wasatch Electric v. Labor Commission

460 P.3d 1049 · Court of Appeals of Utah · Feb 13, 2020

“Once a subsection [(9)] claimant has established a qualifying injury, there is a conclusive presumption that the claimant/employee is permanently totally disabled and no further findings are required.” Id. ¶ 12. … We concluded by stating that “the plain language of the statute clearly establishes that total permanent disability benefits awarded pursuant to subsection [(9)] are not subject to, nor controlled by, the claimant/employee

Fleming v. Vest

475 S.W.3d 576 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 4, 2015

Our standard of review for summary judgment cases is well established. … On the contrary, this analysis in Thompson actually supports appellee’s contention that -the death of Scott Fleming qualified as a “medical injury” and therefore, fell under the | Kauspices of medical malpractice.

Brian Cunningham, in his capacity as Director of the Public Employees Insurance Agency, and Mark D. Scott, Geoff S. Christian, Amanda D. Meadows, Jared Robertson, Damita Johnson, Jason Myers, Michael Cook, William Milam, and Michael T. Smith, in their capacities as Members of the Public Employees Insurance Agency Finance Board v. Air Evac EMS, Inc.

Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia · Jun 13, 2024

We consider the circuit court’s order to be an appealable order on the issue of sovereign immunity: “[A] circuit court's denial of a motion to dismiss that is predicated on qualified immunity … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 525 (1985)).11 With our jurisdiction to review the circuit court’s order established, we proceed to consider the principles of our sovereign immunity jurisprudence. A.

Mendoza v. Monmouth Recycling Corp.

288 N.J. Super. 240 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 7, 1996

The facts surrounding his entry were never really established. Petitioner testified through an interpreter, and his illegal status was apparently regarded by the judge as proved by petitioner's own testimony. … cannot qualify for workers' compensation benefits.

Ex parte Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission (In re: Alabama Always, LLC v. Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission)(Montgomery Circuit Court: CV-23-231).

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · Jun 21, 2024

The Act establishes the AMCC as a state agency with the primary responsibility for awarding and issuing licenses relating to the production of medical cannabis within Alabama. See Ala. … The sovereign immunity established in § 14 extends to the arms and agencies of the state, see Ex parte Tuscaloosa Cnty., 796 So. 2d 1100, 1103 (Ala. 2000), and "affords the State and its agencies an 'absolute' immunity

Jones v. Rudolph

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Nov 14, 1997

. § 28-1-105) is inapplicable to an action against the State because of sovereign immunity. 2. … The March 3, 1995, dismissal of case number 94-864-I was an “adjudication on the merits” and therefore did not qualify as a “judgment or decree against the plaintiff upon any ground not concluding his right of action,”

Jenkins v. Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District

713 Utah Adv. Rep. 37 · Court of Appeals of Utah · Jul 19, 2012

Although “the term ‘governmental function’ was the operative phrase establishing the scope of governmental immunity,” the 1965 version of the UGIA did not define that term. See id. … In doing so, the legislature made it “crystal clear[] that all functions are covered under this governmental immunity” and that the new definition “establishes the legislature’s intent to apply governmental immunity broadly

Wilson v. Sponable

81 A.D.2d 1 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 27, 1981

Decisional law dealing with mental patients and pris *8 oners clearly establishes that the State has a duty of supervision with respect to suicidal persons in its care and custody. … This observation refutes plaintiffs’ contention and establishes that the extent of public services for the care of suicidal prisoners is limited by the resources of the community.

Nagle v. Pennsylvania Insurance Department

46 Pa. Commw. 621 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 26, 1979

issue raised by demurrer as to particular counts against particular respondents, for if petitioners, apart from their class, have not stated a cause of action in some counts as against some respondents even if otherwise qualified … Sections 5 and 6 of the Act of June 2, 1915, P.L. 762, as amended, 77 P.S. §§241, 242, establish the method of determining the amount of premiums, their increase or decrease, and their schedule of payments.

Fisher v. County of Rock

580 N.W.2d 510 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Jun 30, 1998

ANALYSIS The construction of a statute is clearly a question of law and thus reviewable de novo. Hibbing Educ. Ass’n v. Public Employment Relations Bd., 369 N.W.2d 527, 529 (Minn.1985). … Allis-Chalmers Corporation, 390 N.W.2d 848, 851 (Minn.App.1986) (electrical cable installed as part of the electrical transmission system of a pellet plant qualified as an "improvement”); Lovgren v.

Windauer v. O'CONNOR

13 Ariz. App. 442 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Feb 16, 1971

The claim here clearly is not trivial. Yellow Cab Co. of D. C., Inc. v. Dreslin, 86 U.S.App.D.C. 327 , 181 F.2d 626 (1950); Self v. Self, 58 Cal.2d 683 , 26 Cal.Rptr. 97 , 376 P.2d 65 (1962) ; Brown v. … Since joinder of these causes of action is not required and the proof to establish each is different, and since no attempt was made to establish damages for personal injuries in the divorce action, res judicata does not bar

Lamarr v. Utah State Department of Transportation

183 Utah Adv. Rep. 53 · Court of Appeals of Utah · Mar 26, 1992

The Utah Supreme Court has clearly rejected Lamarr’s theory. 4 The specific question of the effect of waiver of immunity on the public duty doctrine was addressed in Ferree. … State, 784 P.2d 1255, 1256 (Utah App.1989) (to reach immunity issue, court must assume duty and negligence). Based on the preceding authority, La-marr must establish the City owed him a “special duty.”

Bruner v. Josephine County

240 Or. App. 276 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 29, 2010

See Friends of Yamhill County, 237 Or App at 177-78 (explaining the relevant factors used to establish a “common law vested right” under section 5(3) of Measure 49). … Whether zoning permissions have ripened to a degree sufficient to immunize the use from regulatory controls is tested by the “common law vested right” doctrine referenced in section 5(3) of Measure 49.

Burns v. Blair County

112 A.3d 690 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2015

We believe the Legislature has clearly precluded the imposition of liability on itself or the local agencies for acts of *699 third parties by its language of § 854.1 ... and that it has not seen fit to waive immunity for … Burns did not establish that the injury was caused by a defect in the County property. Under Mascaro , the government entity is not liable for the criminal acts of others.

David Jones v. City of Port Arthur, Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) · Nov 17, 2016

Despite these amendments, Jones has not pleaded facts to establish he made a qualifying report to the City Manager. … Jones argues on appeal that “[t]he issue and concern for the City Mechanic and [Jones were] that maintenance records (which clearly qualify as ‘government records’ within the meaning of § 37.01(2)(A) of the Penal Code)

Madison Granite Co. v. INDUS. COM'N OF ARIZ.

138 Ariz. 573 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Dec 20, 1983

Because Cason was treated with steroids for his back injury, Kozub stated that to a reasonable degree of medical probability, the use of the steroids sufficiently depressed Cason’s immunity so as to cause the migration of … The carrier argues that only expert medical testimony can be used to establish the causal link between Cason’s injury and the resulting tuberculosis in his spine.

Housing Authority of Newark v. Sagner

142 N.J. Super. 332 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 1, 1976

Its employees enjoy civil service status under guidelines established by the State. N.J.S.A. 55:14A-6.1. … In that case the National Housing Agency was held to be immune from the operation of a local zoning ordinance. That agency was clearly a federal one and not a state one. Leslie Miller, Inc. v.

Spindletop MHMR v. Barbara Beauchamp, on Behalf of Alissa Humphrey

Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) · Feb 26, 2004

Non-use of "ulcer preventing devices" is not use of tangible personal property within the statutory waiver, and allegations of negligent care are not sufficient to establish waiver of immunity. … Such a result would be tantamount to abolishing governmental immunity, contrary to the limited waiver the Legislature clearly intended.