Case law

Lilly v. MARCAL ROPE AND RIGGING INC.

289 Ill. App. 3d 1105 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 14, 1997

immune from suit in tort by its employees. … Since the relative culpabilities of the multiple defendants were rarely so clearly delineated, indemnification was not really a satisfactory tool.

Kevin Rankin v. City of Highland Park

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 24, 2015

Specifically, “[t]he doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … objectively unreasonable action in light of a clearly established constitutional right.

Belt v. Ritter

18 Mich. App. 495 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 31, 1970

Defendants necessarily swore to both of these elements in order to establish a prima facie offense. … their judicial acts, and this_ is well-established in Michigan.

Keith Redburn v. Charmelle Garrett, Individually and as City Manager of the City of Victoria, Texas and Lynn Short, Individually and as Director of Public Works of the City of Victoria, Texas and City of Victoria, Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Feb 28, 2013

Thereafter, the City supplemented its plea to the jurisdiction, arguing that appellant could not establish subject matter jurisdiction for four reasons: (1) sovereign immunity had not been clearly and unambiguously waived … (“Appellee’s Second Amended Petition clearly asserts that appellant’s dumping of hazardous materials on its property was intended[; thus, it] states a cause of action for intentional trespass[ for which immunity has not

Gerard Matzen// Marsha McLane, in Her Official Capacity as Director of Texas Civil Commitment Office, and the Texas Civil Commitment Office v. Marsha McLane, in Her Official Capacity as Director of Texas Civil Commitment Office, and the Texas Civil Commitment Office// Cross-Appellee, Gerard Matzen

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Mar 6, 2020

Fifth issue: McLane’s entitlement to qualified immunity In his fifth issue, Matzen contends that McLane was not entitled to qualified immunity as to his claims alleging that she was: (1) not performing discretionary … (noting that official immunity is also referred to as qualified immunity). Qualified immunity is not at issue when a government employee is sued only in employee’s official capacity.

Williams v. City of Independence

931 S.W.2d 894 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Sep 10, 1996

Nonetheless, such immunity from liability for injuries caused by the condition of public property is expressly waived if the plaintiff establishes that: the property was in dangerous condition at the time of injury, that … We refuse to find that crossing the center line, travelling through the opposite lane of traffic, and driving across several private lawns before hitting a headwall eight feet off of the roadway qualifies as a “slight deviation

Reed v. Jones

81 N.M. 481 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Apr 17, 1970

The burden is on the taxpayer to establish clearly his right to the deduction and the intention to authorize the deduction claimed by the taxpayer must be clearly and unambiguously expressed in the statute. … The taxpayer has not clearly established his right to the deduction because the statute does not clearly and unambiguously authorize the deduction being claimed under the facts of this case.

Public Utility District No. 1 Of Snohomish Co., Apps V. State Of Wa, Resps

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 5, 2023

The Timber Sale Map reveals sale boundary tags along the RMZ near Sultan Basin Road and establishes that the RMZ is not part of the sale area. … The State established through Moon’s uncontroverted expert testimony that the RMZ was the width required by the HCP.

The State of Texas v. Nonparty Patient No. 1, Nonparty Patient No. 2, Nonparty Patient No. 3, Nonparty Patient No. 4, Nonparty Patient No. 5, Nonparty Patient No. 6, Nonparty Patient No. 7, and Nonparty Patient No. 8, Nonparty Patient No. 9, Nonparty Patient No. 10, and Nonparty Patient No. 11

Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District · May 5, 2025

, and the courts must discern whether the Legislature has clearly waived immunity. … Even still, if sovereign immunity extended to the Dallas County proceeding as a matter of common law, the Legislature clearly and unambiguously waived it.

Donald v. Carr

407 S.W.2d 288 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 29, 1966

In this proceeding it has not been established beyond dispute (1) that Relators are qualified voters; (2) that they voted in the Republican Primary of May 7, 1966; (3) that they wrote in the titles of offices, not printed … Under Articles 1823 and 1824, V.A.C.S., as well as Article 1735a, we have authority to issue writs of mandamus, but it is well established that we do not have such authority unless the facts are established beyond dispute

John Mezzalingua Assoc., LLC v. Travelers Indem. Co.

2019 NY Slip Op 9157 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 20, 2019

CPLR 3101 " establishes three categories of protected materials . . . : privileged matter, absolutely immune from discovery (CPLR 3101 [b]); attorney's work product, also absolutely immune (CPLR 3101 [c]); and trial preparation … Because plaintiff "did not establish that the requested material was protected by the qualified immunity privilege set forth in CPLR 3101 (d) for material prepared exclusively in anticipation of litigation, the burden did

Tansavatdi v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes

California Court of Appeal · Jan 29, 2021

Challenging the court’s ruling, appellant contends the city failed to establish any of the elements of design immunity. … cannot shield a failure to warn that is itself caused by a qualifying design under section 830.6.

University of Texas Rio Grande Valley v. Alfredo Castillo

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Nov 9, 2023

Governmental entities in Texas generally enjoy immunity from suit unless the Legislature has expressly waived their immunity by statute. Tex. Nat. Res. Conservation Comm’n v. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d 849, 853 (Tex. 2002). … Racial Discrimination To establish a prima facie case of employment discrimination, Castillo must show that he: (1) is a member of a protected class, (2) was qualified for his position, (3) was subject to an adverse

Kulich-Grier v. OhioHealth Corp.

2014 Ohio 3931 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 11, 2014

To establish a claim for false imprisonment, the plaintiff must first demonstrate that he or she was confined. Ripley v. Montgomery, 10th Dist. No. 07AP-6, 2007-Ohio-7151, ¶ 39. … Therefore, even if OHP was not immune from liability, OHP is still entitled to summary judgment on Kulich-Grier's false imprisonment claim.

Wsk v. Mhsb

922 N.E.2d 671 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Mar 10, 2010

W.S.K. clearly established the first element—he is African-American. The second element—W.S.K.'s qualifications—was the subject of discussion at oral argument. … Therefore, W.S.K. *689 did not establish that he was qualified for privileges at M.H.S.B.

Texas Department of Transportation v. Jones Bros. Dirt & Paving Contractors

24 S.W.3d 893 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 10, 2000

Because we hold that Jones Brothers has not established a waiver of sovereign immunity that would give the trial court jurisdiction to hear its common-law breach-of-contract claim, we likewise hold that the pleadings do not … This assertion is superfluous because Federal Sign clearly states that immunity from liability is waived when the State contracts with private citizens. See 951 S.W.2d at 408 .

Jackson v. Jones

804 N.E.2d 155 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Feb 27, 2004

In insurance policies, "an ambiguity is not affirmatively established simply because controversy exists and one party asserts an interpretation contrary to that asserted by the opposing party." Beam v. Wausau Ins. … uninsured motorist coverage pursuant to the Financial Re *159 sponsibility Act, IC 9-25-2-3, 2 and the requirements for uninsured and underin-sured motorist coverage, ICG 27-7-5-2, 3 the City of Indianapolis is statutorily immune

Shinaberger ex rel. Campbell v. LaPine

109 Wash. App. 304 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 26, 2001

Second, the words “reasonably necessary’ qualify RCW *309 10.14.030 (4)(c). … The statute’s plain language does not support the District’s claim of per se immunity in this case.

Angelique Lockett and Lanetra Lockett v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana, Inc., and Cathy McGee

42 N.E.3d 119 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Aug 17, 2015

[35] The Locketts first argue that the HCCA does not apply in this case because the HCCA “is clearly meant to provide health care providers some measure of immunity for their actions when relying on third … [52] On summary judgment, if the movant carries its burden to establish entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the burden shifts to the non-movant to present evidence establishing the existence of

Israel S. by Owens v. BD. OF EDUC.

235 Ill. App. 3d 652 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 25, 1992

who is qualified to provide information regarding parental incapacity or extreme hardship.” … She established her blood relationship with the plaintiff.