Case law

Emanuel's, L.L.C. v. Restore Marietta, Inc.

206 N.E.3d 116 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 17, 2023

The court found that the facts in the complaint were “insufficient to establish any of the exceptions to immunity.” The court also found the City immune from the Valentine Act claim under the state action doctrine. … . {¶29} Emanuel’s also suggests that the City qualifies as a “person” who can violate the Valentine Act, asserting that the United States Supreme Court “has established that a municipal corporation can also be a

Brittany Fraser v. Samuel Rolofson

Court of Appeals of Virginia · Jul 30, 2024

The circuit court’s decision to dismiss Rolofson’s defamation claim due to qualified privilege Rolofson challenges the circuit court’s rulings that Fraser established … As we find that the record established Fraser’s statements were absolutely privileged, we need not decide the issues of malice or qualified privilege. Banks v. Commonwealth, 280 Va. 612, 617 (2010).

Samuel Rolofson v. Brittany Fraser

Court of Appeals of Virginia · Jul 30, 2024

The circuit court’s decision to dismiss Rolofson’s defamation claim due to qualified privilege Rolofson challenges the circuit court’s rulings that Fraser established … As we find that the record established Fraser’s statements were absolutely privileged, we need not decide the issues of malice or qualified privilege. Banks v. Commonwealth, 280 Va. 612, 617 (2010).

James v. Wilson

95 S.W.3d 875 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Apr 19, 2002

official immunity, “bad faith” can be predicated on a violation of a “constitutional, statutory, or other clearly established right which a person in the public employee’s position presumptively would have known was afforded … for concluding that his failure to promulgate a written rule requiring student athletes to wear batting helmets during baseball practice “violated any constitutional, statutory, or other clearly established right applicable

McGee v. Snyder See also Supplemental Opinion Upon Denial of Rehearing - filed Nov. 7, 2001

Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 29, 2001

Qualified Immunity Finally, defendants contend that, insofar as plaintiffs seek to recover damages, their claims are barred by the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Plaintiffs have not met their burden of showing that defendants' conduct violated any clearly established right; therefore, we hold that defendants are entitled to qualified immunity in the present case. III.

In re Cline

230 N.C. App. 11 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 1, 2013

“Generally, qualified immunity protects public officials from personal liability for performing discretionary functions to the extent that such conduct “ ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Cline possess a qualified immunity to make those untruthful statements with reckless disregard for the truth.”

Brazos Transit District v. Arturo Lozano

Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) · Mar 28, 2002

conversely if the employee is protected by qualified immunity, then so is the governmental entity; and "[t]o that extent, a claim of sovereign immunity may be 'based on' an individual's assertion of qualified immunity and … This cannot fairly be characterized as an assertion of qualified immunity. Brazos' attempt to appeal fails under section (5).

Pedraza v. New York City Tr. Auth.

2022 NY Slip Op 00255 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 13, 2022

That motion was premised on the TA's position that it was entitled to qualified immunity. … Even if the TA ultimately is able to establish through the testimony of its witnesses and other evidence that it is entitled to qualified immunity, we conclude that it is not entitled under any circumstances to the shield

Estate of Randolph v. City of Wichita

459 P.3d 802 · Court of Appeals of Kansas · Jan 21, 2020

The immunity applies in § 1983 actions unless the government agents have violated "a federal statutory or constitutional right" and the wrongfulness of their conduct was "'clearly established at the time'" they acted. … The KTCA's adoptive immunity provision similarly does not incorporate qualified immunity.

Fontanetta v. John Doe 1

73 A.D.3d 78 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 30, 2010

In Crepin v Fogarty ( 59 AD3d 837, 839 [2009]), the Appellate Division, Third Department, found that a deed qualified as “documentary evidence” where it conclusively established the validity of the disputed easement. … The printed materials submitted by the defendants do not qualify as documentary evidence, with the possible exception of the attendance sheets, which are clearly insufficient to resolve all factual issues. .

Wynn v. Cole

68 Mich. App. 706 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 17, 1976

This complaint would seem clearly sufficient under that standard. A complaint in libel must include the contents of the libelous statement and must also show where the alleged libel was published. … Qualified privilege was defined by the Supreme Court in the case of Bacon v Michigan C R Co, 66 Mich 166, 170 ; 33 NW 181 (1887): "Qualified privilege * * * extends to all communications made bona ñde upon any subject-matter

Casamasino v. City of Jersey City

304 N.J. Super. 226 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 2, 1997

tax assessor was not so apparent as to deprive him of the qualified immunity. … In so ruling, we are mindful that the availability of qualified immunity generally, when possible, should be decided on summary judgment. See Kirk v.

Quintana v. City of Westminster

2000 Colo. J. C.A.R. 641 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Feb 3, 2000

The burden of proving jurisdiction is on the plaintiff, and the trial court's findings of fact supporting a determination under the Act will not be reversed unless clearly erroneous. … Macaluso, supra, 892 P.2d at 277 (§ 24-10-106(1)(a) of the Act "does not require emergency vehicle operators to comply with section 42-4-106(4) in order to qualify for sovereign immunity").

Maio v. Kralik

70 A.D.3d 1 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 10, 2009

Kralik, as Sheriff of the County of Rockland, was entitled to qualified immunity. … “A government official is protected by qualified immunity insofar as the official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known” (Sagendorf-Teal

Estate of Williams v. Pasquotank County Parks & Recreation Department

211 N.C. App. 627 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 3, 2011

However, when the motion is made on the grounds of sovereign and qualified immunity, such a denial is immediately appealable, because to force a defendant to proceed with a trial from which he should be immune would vitiate … What qualifies as a governmental function and what qualifies as a proprietary function is not always clear; our Supreme Court noted in Sides v.

Winkles v. State

40 Md. App. 616 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 3, 1978

We see the alleged agreement — accepting arguendo appellant’s version of it — as neither a plea bargain nor a promised grant of immunity. … Bowie involved an alleged offer of immunity by the State’s Attorney which, we said, he had no authority to make. 3 In this instance, the State’s Attorney was clearly authorized to proceed or not to proceed with the prosecution

Fallang v. Cormier

63 Ohio App. 3d 450 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 30, 1989

Clearly, under the rule enunciated in Willitzer , had appellee’s statements been made during the deposition, appellee would have been entitled to the privilege and absolute immunity. … In conclusion, appellee’s statements were entitled to immunity under both absolute and qualified privileges.

King v. Texas Department of Human Services

28 S.W.3d 27 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Sep 12, 2000

While this statute establishes a time limit for filing a civil action, it does not set a time limit for pleading appropriate jurisdictional facts. … Reasonable minds could therefore find either applicant more qualified or each equally qualified.

Oscar Ortega, Roggie Law, Steven Murdock, and Don Egdorf v. Alan Pean

Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Apr 11, 2019

Thus, to defeat a claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show that (1) the defendant’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged … See id. at 630 (to negate officer’s assertion of qualified immunity, plaintiff must present summary judgment evidence demonstrating an issue of material fact as to whether officer’s actions violated clearly established

Brook v. April

294 N.J. Super. 90 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 30, 1996

The judge reasoned that, if the municipal defendants were immune under the Tort Claims Act, defendants in this suit could not be liable for omitting to file the notice required to qualify plaintiff as a claimant under that … The same conclusion governs the relationship between causes of action conferred by the Workers' Compensation Law and the categorical immunities established in the Tort Claims Act.