Case law

Port Iron & Supply Co. v. Moore

153 S.W.2d 319 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jun 19, 1941

The receiver thus appointed, after having duly qualified as such, caused himself to be substituted as plaintiff herein. … We have carefully reviewed the evidence adduced and we are not prepared to say that the fact elements necessary and essential to sustain the defense urged by appellant were established conclusively by undisputed testimony

Kim v. Randal A. Lowry & Assocs.

2023 Ohio 3232 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 13, 2023

immunity. … immunity.

People ex rel. Birkett v. City of Chicago

Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 10, 2001

Although on its face the immunity in section 2--201 would apply to alleged constitutional violations because such violations meet the definition of "injury" in section 1--204, the title of the Tort Immunity Act clearly indicates … The Diocese's last argument is that the trial court erred in dismissing its nuisance claim because the City did not establish the elements of local governmental discretionary immunity under the Tort Immunity Act.

Anderson v. Brown Brothers, Inc.

65 Mich. App. 409 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 12, 1975

From my review of the record, however, I cannot say that the trial judge's findings of fact and conclusions of law were clearly erroneous. … I also agree with both my colleagues that the finding of the trial judge that neither gross negligence nor wilful and wanton misconduct, pleaded in count two, was established was not clearly erroneous and is not to be disturbed

Durfor v. W. Mansfield Conservation Club

2022 Ohio 416 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 14, 2022

Research, the plaintiff went to a service station to fill his tires with an air pump that “was clearly marked with a sign stating ‘Free Air.’” Roesch v. Warren Distrib./Fleet Eng. … He therefore claim[ed] that he qualifie[d] as a business invitee because he [was] a prospective paying customer. Id. at ¶ 11.

Boeken v. Philip Morris USA Inc.

217 Cal. App. 4th 992 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 9, 2013

The Immunity Statute Philip Morris argues that liability and causation could not be established through collateral estoppel in Dylan‟s action because, as a result of cases decided after Richard‟s trial, there was a … Fairness Application of collateral estoppel to establish liability and causation was unfair, Philip Morris contends, because there was a material change in the law on the Immunity Statute after the trial in Richard

State v. Johnson

386 Wis. 2d 629 · Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · Mar 19, 2019

Harris , 2010 WI 79 , ¶32, 326 Wis. 2d 685 , 786 N.W.2d 409 , and a circuit court erroneously exercises its discretion when it relies upon "clearly irrelevant or improper factors," id. , ¶30. … Rather, the circuit court very clearly emphasized that Johnson had brought harmful narcotics across state lines and into a community that was being severely damaged by heroin use.

Robert Rodriguez v. Scott Ginsburg

Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · Aug 26, 2019

However, when the traditional motion is clearly dispositive of issues in the motion, an appellate court may look to it first on those issues. See Kennedy, 2018 WL 3738091, at *3. … properly thought of as an immunity while conditional privileges are “true privileges.”

People v. Baker

122 N.Y.S.3d 325 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 25, 2020

"The Board [of Examiners of Sex Offenders] Guidelines make it clear the [risk assessment instrument] scoring is predicated upon consideration of an offender's current offense,' which clearly relates to the SORA qualifying … with the qualifying offense.

Freeny v. City of San Buenaventura

California Court of Appeal · Jun 4, 2013

On appeal, plaintiffs bear the burden of establishing error. (San Mateo, supra, at p. 426.) I. … By contrast, reading section 822.2's exception for misrepresentations motivated by actual fraud, corruption or actual malice as not qualifying the tort immunity that otherwise attaches to legislators' policy making decisions

Watford v. Unsatisfied Claim & Judgment Fund Board

113 N.J. Super. 495 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 23, 1971

J. 341 (1969), destroying sovereign immunity, shows the *506 judicial journey into enlightenment and justice in these matters. … It is but a short step from destroying the sovereign immunity of the State to the detriment of its citizens to judicial incursion into the Fund’s cacoon of claimed immunity.

City of Columbus v. Barnstone

921 S.W.2d 268 · Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Aug 3, 1995

The City asserts it is immune from liability because its officers are entitled to official immunity for their actions. … The federal test requires courts look to “whether a reasonable official could have believed his or her conduct to be lawful in light of clearly established law and the information possessed by the official at the time the

LeRay v. Bartholomew

871 So. 2d 492 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 30, 2004

We find Kelty to be clearly distinguishable. … After a settlement with one qualified provider and dismissal of the other, the LPCF was added to the lawsuit.

Mueller v. Community Consolidated School District 54

287 Ill. App. 3d 337 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 24, 1997

Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act). 745 ILCS 10/2—103, 2—104, 2—109, 2—201 (West 1994). … to dismiss established that the asserted defense is unfounded.

B.K., Individually and as Next Friend of T.K., C.K., P.K., and N.K., Minors v. Lynn Jacob Cox, Independent of the Estate of Michael Dennis Cox, and Baylor College of Medicine

Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Aug 28, 2003

The summary judgment was proper only if the movants conclusively established each element of this defense. See Science Spectrum, Inc. v. Martinez , 941 S.W.2d 910, 911 (Tex. 1997). … But, if a case was filed in a court, even if the court ultimately decided it had no jurisdiction over a case, judicial immunity would protect the judge = s actions before the case was dismissed. [8] Obviously, a judge qualifies

Area Mental Health, Mental Retardation & Substance Abuse Authority v. Speed

69 N.C. App. 247 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 3, 1984

Indeed, such a requirement would have the anomalous effect of rendering reduction-in-force decisions immune from claims of illegal discrimination and consequent judicial scrutiny. … Speed was qualified for her job, and that her discharge resulted from discriminatory motives.

Paul Martin Clark and Black Citizens for Justice, Law and Order, Inc. v. Gladys Elaine Blanton Jenkins

Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo) · Feb 22, 2008

–Amarillo 1996, writ denied).16 Clearly, all communications to public officials are not absolutely privileged. Hurlbut, 749 S.W.2d at 768. … Initial communications “to a public officer . . . who is authorized or privileged to take action” are subject to only a qualified privilege, not absolute immunity. Id.

City of Houston v. Kenneth S. Jones

Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Aug 19, 2004

A plaintiff has the burden to establish a waiver of immunity from suit. Jones , 8 S.W.3d at 638. Immunity from suit can be waived only by legislative consent or constitutional amendment. Wichita Falls State Hosp. v. … To the contrary, the language of article II, section 1 of the City’s charter clearly and unambiguously waives the City’s immunity from suit for such claims.

STATE EX REL. PUBLIC HOUSING v. Krohn

98 S.W.3d 911 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 11, 2003

A defending party may establish a right to judgment as a matter of law by showing: (1) facts that negate any one of the claimant's elements facts, (2) that the non-movant, after an adequate period of discovery, has not been … and clearly mandated public policy, the employee has a cause of action in tort for damages for wrongful discharge.'"

ATLANTIC MICROFILM CORPORATION v. Turner

7 N.C. App. 258 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 25, 1970

Highway Commission, 230 N.C. 489 , 53 S.E. 2d 517 (1949), it is said: “That the sovereign may not be sued, either in its own courts or elsewhere, without its consent, is an established principle of jurisprudence in all civilized … Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 25 R.C.L. 412. * * * ‘The State is immune from suit unless and until it has expressly consented to be sued.