Case law

Abernathy v. Employers Ins. of Wausau

428 So. 2d 272 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 10, 1982

The legislature clearly intended to overrule Miami Roofing and, therefore, to permit tort actions by one subcontractor's employee against another subcontractor. … contract work to a subcontractor or subcontractors, all of the employees of such contractor and subcontractor or subcontractors engaged on such contract work shall be deemed to be employed in one and the same business or establishment

Zurenda v. Commonwealth

46 Pa. Commw. 67 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 18, 1979

We will consider the objections seriatim. 2 In ruling on preliminary objections, we accept as true all well and clearly pleaded facts as well as inferences fairly deducible therefrom, but not conclusions or averments of law … rule of immunity.”

Tokeshi v. State of California

217 Cal. App. 3d 999 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 1, 1990

The Court of Appeal found that “the *1007 certificate of ownership here issued can clearly be construed as a ‘misrepresentation’ by the Department of Motor Vehicles of the true ownership of the vehicle, falling within the … In its respondent’s brief, County states: “In 1986 there was no established tolerance for Plictran 50W on raspberries.

Com. v. Belgrave, J.

307 A.3d 1240 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 28, 2023

the Commonwealth did not first establish that the victim was conscious. … Looking at factor 5, clearly there was a change in strategy at the time of trial.

Janis v. California State Lottery Commission

80 Cal. Rptr. 2d 549 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 30, 1998

Janis cannot establish this claim. Government Code section 8880.24 was intended to protect against hatin caused by false and misleading advertising of lottery games. … Contrary to Janis’s contention, the section 8880.4 claim does not qualify as an “amended claim” under Government Code section 910.6.

Harris County v. Going

896 S.W.2d 305 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Apr 13, 1995

Gary Jones to qualify with his service pistol as required by our rules (#30) and Constable Douglas’ rules. … Patrolman Going failed to qualify by not taking the required test in 1987 and violat *308 ed rules #4, 17E and 27E of the Park Police rules dated August 17, 1984.

Fulford v. Jenkins

195 N.C. App. 402 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 17, 2009

It is well established that contracts for insurance are to be interpreted under the same rules of law as are applicable to other written contracts. … immunity.

N.C. Sturgeon, L.P. and Wilks Masonry Corp. v. Sul Ross State University (Part of the Texas State University System)

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jan 16, 2003

Sovereign immunity consists of immunity from liability, which the State waives when it contracts with a private party, and immunity from suit, which is not waived by the act of entering into a contract. Id. … Generally, a party seeking to sue the State must show that the State's immunity from suit has been waived by express consent; express consent may be established by statute or legislative resolution. Id.

Riley v. Southwest Marine, Inc.

203 Cal. App. 3d 1242 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 28, 1988

The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the general contractor which was not a borrowing or de facto employer qualified for tort immunity as an “employer” under sections 904(a) and 905(a) of the LHWCA solely because … The court held “Mobil’s naked allegation that it is a general contractor is clearly an insufficient basis upon which to afford it tort immunity under the Act.” (Id. at p. 446.)

True v. Utah Department of Transportation

427 P.3d 338 · Court of Appeals of Utah · May 10, 2018

But these factors present in the Trues’ situation will not always be so clearly present in other cases. ¶59 The first line-drawing problem I perceive is a temporal one. … In my view, UDOT’s actions in approving this particular traffic control plan differ from governmental actions deemed potentially too informal to qualify for immunity pursuant to the “permit exception.”

Smolow v. PA. DEPT. OF REV.

119 Pa. Commw. 324 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 8, 1988

and remain immune from suit except as the General Assembly shall waive the immunity. … the legislature could declare sovereign immunity to be constitutional.

Davis v. Schwankl

70 P.3d 509 · Colorado Court of Appeals · May 27, 2003

under the reporting statute and, because the crime being reported was in progress, the person could also recover legal fees incurred in establishing that immunity. … In our view, the jury's answers do not establish that plaintiff committed any erimes.

Belcher v. Kentucky Parole Board

917 S.W.2d 584 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Mar 15, 1996

Obviously, Belcher has a legitimate interest in a decision rendered in conformity with the established procedures and policies; one which is based upon consideration of relevant criteria. … Inasmuch as Belcher possesses no entitlement to parole and the record clearly reflects he was afforded procedural due process, the trial court properly dismissed the action.

Scruby v. Waugh

476 N.E.2d 533 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 18, 1985

Scruby, establishes that he was not a patient within the meaning of the Act. We do not agree. Rather, we determine that Waugh was a patient of Dr. … Bo-naventura on Detterline’s behalf, Detter-line qualified as a “patient” of Dr. Bona-ventura as the term is defined in 16-9.5-1 — 1(c).

Stringfield v. City of Hackensack

68 N.J. Super. 38 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 26, 1961

the immunity, in part by means of "a more lenient attitude toward the proprietary classification." … Defendant urges N.J.S.A. 40:60-25.5 in support of its alleged immunity.

Lyonette Silks, Inc. v. K. Wilbur Dolson Co.

187 A.D. 473 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 2, 1919

A complaint which is immune from attack must state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. … It was not by the contract required to perform any conditions prior to the adjustment of the line of credit which has never been made, and it clearly cannot be construed to be deemed a request for the adjudgment of that line

People v. Campbell

137 Cal. App. 3d 867 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 30, 1982

The People would stand this exception on its head, by applying it to a statute which expressly establishes the standard of immunity. … Nor did the trial court seek to weigh the consequences of immunity against the need for the testimony, by invoking its statutory power to determine whether immunity “would be clearly contrary to the public interest.”

Mt. Pleasant Independent School District v. Dona K. Elliott

Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana) · Apr 17, 2014

The appeal turns on whether Elliott established at least a fact issue about a waiver of sovereign immunity. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. … from liability under Section 21.912(c) of the Texas Education Code, which grants qualified immunity to school employees for acts done within the scope of their employment involving judgment or discretion, the court noted

McIntosh v. McElveen

893 So. 2d 986 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 2, 2005

To reverse a fact finder's determination, the appellate court must find from the record that a reasonable factual basis does not exist for the finding of the trial court and that the record establishes that the finding is … clearly wrong.

Alvarez v. Snyder

264 A.D.2d 27 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 13, 2000

The Second Circuit has stated that “judicial immunity is by now a well-established doctrine. * * * A judge defending against a section 1983 suit is entitled to absolute immunity from damages for actions performed in his judicial … The measures taken by the court clearly do not overstep the immunity conferred on Justice Snyder in this action seeking personal damages.