Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.34s
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Apr 26, 2007
Accordingly, we hold that SES's allegation of assignment was sufficient to establish standing and that the trial court did not err in granting SES's motion for leave to file an amended petition. … However, SES's claim for quantum meruit is clearly an alternative pleading.
Cited 0 timesPublished684 So. 2d 460 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 8, 1996
As we have previously stated, the district court clearly determined that OBRA '93 was not applicable to the present case. … For purposes of the previous sentence, the term "grantor" *465 means the individual referred to in paragraph (2). (2) For purposes of this subsection, a "medicaid qualifying trust" is a trust, or similar legal device, established
Cited 9 timesPublished339 N.J. Super. 312 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 20, 2001
However, the Court clearly announced that “the standard we enunciate is applicable to all persons who have willingly, and with the approval of the [biological or adoptive] parent, undertaken the duties of a parent to a child … Without such a requirement, a paid nanny or babysitter could theoretically qualify for parental status.
Cited 6 timesPublishedTexas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana) · Jan 18, 2008
The facts constituting dedication cannot be left to conjecture; when the asserted dedication rests in estoppel, the evidence should clearly and satisfactorily establish the necessary facts. Henderson v. … from liability and immunity from suit.
Cited 0 timesPublishedState ex rel. Heller v. Thornhill
174 Mo. App. 469 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Nov 3, 1913
It seems to me that all of the qualities and incidents which inhere in the action of the county court on presentation of a petition for dramshop license, and make that action judicial, and immune from collateral attack, equally … So that clearly relator, by his petition for mandamus, is asking the court to again hear the evidence and decide the questions of law and fact which were presented to and passed upon by the county *481 court.
Cited 9 timesPublishedSun Harbor Homeowners Ass'n v. Broward County Department of Natural Resource Protection
700 So. 2d 178 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 15, 1997
an immunity on petitioner, that immunity necessarily results from the legislature’s plenary power to abolish specific regulatory powers of a county by general law. … As we have just seen, the constitution has established a general immunity against attempted county regulation when the legislature has repealed the authority to regulate.
Cited 3 timesPublished168 A.D.2d 711 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 6, 1990
The parties do not dispute that petitioners substantially prevailed in this proceeding and that the records were of clearly significant interest to the general public. … immunity.
Cited 1 timesPublished36 S.W.3d 809 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Feb 13, 2001
Between November, 1991, and September, 1993, [River Fleets] paid $92,216.63 in surcharges imposed by § 319.132.1, RSMo Supp. 1991, for deposit into the underground storage tank insurance fund established by § 319.129, RSMo … Accordingly, in order to qualify as an action under § 536.050.1 and to be entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs under § 536.050.3, a case must involve a declaratory judgment addressing a challenge to either (1) the validity
Cited 6 timesPublishedWillie L Faison v. City of Highland Park Michigan
Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 17, 2026
proposition” and that plaintiff had clearly pleaded the essential elements of a promissory-estoppel claim rather than a negligence claim. … We agree with the trial court, however, that defendant cannot avail itself of such immunity here.
Cited 0 timesPublishedCounty of Harris v. Tennessee Products Pipe Line Co.
332 S.W.2d 777 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Feb 18, 1960
That case held that counties have no powers or duties except those clearly set forth and defined in the Constitution and statutes of the State and that the Commissioners Court of a county had neither express nor implied power … parties agree that damages which would result to appellees in the event of interference by appellant with either the line constructed or the operation therof, even if recoverable (in view of appellant’s general governmental immunity
Cited 5 timesPublishedTexas Court of Appeals, 15th District · Dec 18, 2024
This appeal turns on novel questions about (1) the Texas Legislature’s waiver of sovereign or governmental immunity for challenges to the validity of rules, like those establishing and amending ECRS, promulgated by an … About Aspire Power Ventures Aspire is a Market Participant—specifically, a Qualified Scheduling Entity (“QSE”)—that operates in several markets administered by ERCOT.
Cited 0 timesPublishedCity of Houston v. Christopher A. Rhule
377 S.W.3d 734 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Jun 7, 2012
-Houston [1st Dist.] 2008, pet. denied) (holding pleadings alleged sufficient facts to establish waiver of immunity from suit and to defeat plea to jurisdiction and declining to determine plaintiffs damage claim through plea … We conclude that Rhule established that the City waived its immunity from suit on his claim for breach of the Settlement Agreement and that the City is liable for damages on Rhule’s claims like any private person.
Reversed on other grounds by City of Houston v. Christopher Rhule, 2013 Tex. LEXIS 951 (2013)Cited 5 timesPublishedTexas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) · Jan 9, 2026
It is well established that a licensed physician is not automatically qualified to testify on every medical question. Broders, 924 S.W.2d at 152. … Instead, the offering party is required to establish that the expert has “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education” regarding the specific issue before the court that would qualify the expert to give an opinion
Cited 0 timesPublished37 Ill. App. 3d 673 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 19, 1976
It is extremely important that we express clearly and unequivocally that the contempt adjudication against Hogan would be reversed even if his advice were incorrect. … Allegedly contemptous behavior which falls within the second category of direct criminal contempt must be established by extrinsic evidence at a fair and impartial hearing. (In re Oliver; People v. Skar.)
Modified by People Ex Rel. Kunce v. Hogan, 67 Ill. 2d 55 (1977)Cited 21 timesPublished71 Mich. App. 200 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 8, 1976
Plaintiff, pointing out that the section sets up two classes, one immune from most tort liability and the other not, claims that he, as a victim of injuries caused by a member of the class granted immunity, is subjected to … Plaintiff, as an automobile accident victim, might find his ability to maintain an action qualified by the immunity granted by the statute.
Cited 39 timesPublished785 N.W.2d 771 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Jul 20, 2010
Cole, 561 N.W.2d 143, 147-48 (Minn.1997) (absolute privilege); Jadwin, 367 N.W.2d at 481 (qualified privilege). The burden of persuasion on whether the privilege applies is upon the party claiming the defense. … Common-law malice, which applies to qualified privilege cases, *784 requires only a showing of ill will or improper motive. Moreno v. Crookston Times Printing Co., 610 N.W.2d 321, 328 (Minn.2000).
Abrogated by Leiendecker v. Asian Women United of Minnesota, 2014 Minn. LEXIS 289 (2014)Cited 16 timesPublished443 So. 2d 427 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 5, 1984
Boynton contends that Luke's immunity from suit only strengthens his entitlement to uninsured motorist benefits. … The court rejected this argument, stating: The policy now clearly envisions that where a bodily injury liability policy is applicable at the time of the accident, then the uninsured motorist portion of the policy is inapplicable
Reversed by Allstate Ins. Co. v. Boynton, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 97 (1986)Cited 15 timesPublishedGreen v. Chicago Board of Education
Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 22, 2011
Section 4-102 of the Act states, in relevant part: “Neither a local public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to establish a police department or otherwise provide police … Section 4-102 of the Act does not contain the same qualifying language as section 3-108 of the Act.
Cited 0 timesPublishedHays County v. Hays County Water Planning Partnership
106 S.W.3d 349 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 8, 2003
The Texas Constitution establishes the commissioners court as the county’s principal governing body. Tex. Const. art. V, § 18. … and legislative immunity.
Cited 61 timesPublished172 S.W.3d 146 · Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) · Aug 11, 2005
ELEMENTS OF DEFENSE OF OFFICIAL IMMUNITY Official immunity is an affirmative defense. City of Lancaster v. Chambers, 883 S.W.2d 650, 653 (Tex.1994). … We-thington’s testimony from his deposition clearly shows he believed otherwise. The call Wethington received was from the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office dispatcher.
Cited 15 timesPublished
Ask Donna