Case law

Kerry L. Erickson, V. Pharmacia Llc.

548 P.3d 226 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 1, 2024

Perrillo was qualified to testify about neuropsychological effects of PCB exposure. Under ER 702, a witness may qualify as an expert “by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.” … As an example, a nonphysician may qualify as an expert to testify in a medical malpractice case. Id.

Denmark v. State

1997 Colo. J. C.A.R. 1756 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Sep 4, 1997

Appellate review of this determination is conducted under the highly deferential, clearly erroneous standard. Trinity Broadcasting of Denver, Inc. v. City of Westminster, 848 P.2d 916 (Colo.1993). … Here, the record establishes that the athletic field upon which plaintiff was injured was part of a multi-use complex.

Bailey v. Town of Bourne

38 Mass. App. Ct. 70 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Jan 26, 1995

Some of the Federal decisions permitting suit against the government rely on local law that does not clearly distinguish — as does Elias v. … To permit a party to ignore that immunity by making and releasing a claim against the employee and then to bring suit against the public employer rewards the complainant for not honoring the immunity established by the statute

the City of Corpus Christi v. Aguirre Properties, Inc. and Gilbert Aguirre, Ii

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District · Dec 19, 2013

The court of appeals reversed, reasoning that the plaintiff had failed to establish that the TTCA’s waiver of immunity from suit applied to the case: 11  Appellee alleged … See Dallas Area Rapid Transit, 104 S.W.3d at 542. 2 2 We note that on appeal, the City has not addressed whether the Plaintiffs’ pleadings establish that its immunity from suit has been waived under

Ramirez v. City of Chicago

212 Ill. App. 3d 751 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 5, 1991

The trial court held that, pursuant to section 3 — 102(a) of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Ill. Rev. … In a cause of action based on negligence, the plaintiff must establish the existence of a duty, a breach of that duty and an injury proximately resulting from a breach of that duty. (Pelham v.

Mike Morath, in His Official Capacity as Commissioner of Education for the Texas Education Agency v. Texas State Teachers Association

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 21, 2025

. § 11.174.1 A school district that enters into such a contract qualifies for an exemption from intervention and sanctions—and also qualifies for additional funding—if the entity with which it contracts is either (1) the … The language of the statute that general counsel is the ‘final authority’ clearly mandates that result.”)).

Sayers Ex Rel. Sayers v. Beltrami County

472 N.W.2d 656 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Aug 29, 1991

Discretionary immunity may not, however, protect the implementation of an already established policy, because even though implementation may require professional or scientific judgments, it may not require the balancing of … Clearly, however, implementation decisions premised only on safety concerns are not immune from scrutiny. Nusbaum, 422 N.W.2d at 721 ; El Ela, 468 N.W.2d at 582 ; Pletan, 460 N.W.2d at 77 .

People v. Drennon

17 Brief Times Rptr. 521 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Mar 25, 1993

If the General Assembly had intended the result reached by the trial court, we must assume that it would have employed statutory terminology which clearly expressed that intent, as it has done under other circumstances. … Consequently, in accordance with the explicit terms of the statute, the defendant has failed to establish the legal elements of § 18-1-704.5 to bar prosecution.

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 .

Nolan v. Bronson

185 Mich. App. 163 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 22, 1990

As previously noted, a duty of care may be established by statute, or by the common law. … A bus which is operated in the manner required by § 682 is clearly employed in a specific function or to produce a desired effect.

Olympic Waste Services, a Division of Allied Waste Industries, Inc. v. the City of Grand Saline, Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler) · Sep 29, 2006

themselves, waive immunity from suit. … “sue and be sued” in Section 51.013 does not unambiguously waive immunity.

Bass v. City of New York

38 A.D.2d 407 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 3, 1972

It had assumed the burden of protection by establishing a police force. It did not fulfill its obligation by assignment of one man to provide such protection.” … On the contrary, the testimony of the plaintiff’s witnesses clearly established that the policy of remaining outside the project unless otherwise requested was followed with respect to all buildings in the area and that the

Texas Department of Public Safety v. Leroy Torres

Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District · Dec 16, 2024

As is clearly required by the Department of Labor's final rules on USERRA from 2005: Section 1002.226 establishes that the employer must make reasonable accommodations for any disability incurred in or aggravated … Within the vast network of the Texas government, there were positions for which Captain Torres was qualified or could become qualified through training -- even if it means displacing another employee. (38 U.S.C. § 4312(e)

Harris County v. White

823 S.W.2d 385 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jan 14, 1992

Clearly, deprivations of rights pursuant to official custom or policy may lead to governmental liability, Monell v. … Harris County’s policy of transporting prisoners by van is clearly not an unconstitutional policy.

Kethman v. Oceola Township

88 Mich. App. 94 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 16, 1979

The plaintiffs complaint and proofs do not support such an award, and the doctrine of governmental immunity is clearly applicable under Galli, supra. … In pertinent part that panel stated: "Our examination of the law in this case has failed to reveal any authority whatsoever that would establish that this permit is a contract.

Ramirez v. State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Department

6 N.M. 119 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · May 1, 2014

Const. art. 1, § 8, cl. 4 (providing that Congress shall have the power to establish “uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States”). … (emphasis omitted)); The Federalist No. 32, at 155 (Alexander Hamilton) (Gideon ed. 2001) (“[A]s the plan of the convention aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the state governments would clearly retain all the

Shenkman v. O'Malley

2 A.D.2d 567 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 27, 1956

The rule was clearly stated by this court, many years ago: “ The important question is whether the defendant had the right to impugn the motives of its assailant, if it did so honestly without malice and for the sole purpose … Indeed, the larger the business the greater would be the scope of immunity from liability for injury.

Old Republic National Title v. Cap Fund 783

2026 UT App 37 · Court of Appeals of Utah · Mar 19, 2026

¶7 Old Republic moved for summary judgment on all five of Matt’s claims, asserting interpleader immunity as to the Original Claims and arguing Matt could not establish the elements of the Additional Claims as a matter … “A finding of bad faith is a question of fact and is reviewed by this court under the clearly erroneous standard, but a without merit determination is a question of law that we review for correctness.” Id.

Moreland v. Board of County Commissioners

725 P.2d 1 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Nov 21, 1985

In Justus , the Jefferson County School District established a regulation which provided that only students in the upper elementary grades were permitted to ride their bicycles to school. … Here, La Plata County Resolution No. 1973-130 adopted the U.B.C., which clearly required decks more than 30 inches above ground level to be equipped with a guard rail.

Lichtman v. Siemens Indus. Inc.

224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 725 · California Court of Appeal, 5th District · Nov 2, 2017

The contract between defendant and the City was clearly intended to, and does, affect plaintiffs. This factor fails to support the conclusion that defendant owed no duty as a matter of law. b. … Code, § 810 et seq. ) and provides immunity to government entities under certain circumstances. It does not provide a blanket immunity to government entities under all circumstances, however. ( De La Rosa v.