Case law

D'AMATO v. Superior Court

167 Cal. App. 4th 861 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 21, 2008

Petitioner’s Indictment Is Largely Based on Legislative Activity The district attorney contends none of the alleged acts underlying petitioner’s indictment qualify for legislative immunity. We disagree. … The attorneys to whom Tanenbaum directed the memo never provided an opinion letter, explaining they did not feel qualified to respond.

ORRILL v. AIG, Inc.

2009 La.App. 4 Cir. 0888 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 21, 2010

Thus, the class was clearly established and counsel had been appointed to represent it. … This Court rejected Citizens’ assertions of immunity in the Reed case. Citizens appealed to the Louisiana Supreme Court; however, it later withdrew the appeal. . 2008-C-1468 .

Mintz v. Village of Pepper Pike

57 Ohio App. 2d 185 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 22, 1978

Indeed, to prevail, this court has concluded that a litigant must: “clearly establish, in substance, that the legislative body could not have reasonably believed the necessity of regulation in the public interest outweighed … Taking all of the relevant factors and circumstances into account, we conclude that the appellees failed to establish heyond fair debate that the ordinance was clearly arbitrary and unreasonable, having no relation to publie

Burger v. Midland Cogeneration Venture

202 Mich. App. 310 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 1, 1993

granted defendants’ motion for summary disposition pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(7), determining that defendants were statutory employers under the wdca and were entitled to its exclusive remedy provisions, thereby providing immunity … The motion should be granted only if the claim is so clearly unenforceable as a matter of law that no factual development could justify recovery. Id., 450-451 .

Williams v. State of California

62 Cal. App. 3d 960 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 21, 1976

The court in Ramos rationalized that even if the county or its agents had discretion to establish additional requirements of eligibility, the Labor Code forbids the employment of the minors under conditions not *968 complied … Elton, Ramos, Bradford and Elson discloses that in each of these cases the reviewing court concluded that the failure to discharge the mandatory duty imposed by the enactment relied upon was the failure to perform a duty clearly

Richter v. College of Du Page

2013 IL App (2d) 130095 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 25, 2014

So it was an overall policy that [Kornsey] established, and then he had to make the discretionary decision as to this particular slab.” … The court determined that the city was not entitled to discretionary immunity under section 2-201 because: (1) the city had established a program of annually regrading all its unimproved alleys, which merely

Aaron Patrick Taylor v.Joseph Winston Harsh

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Feb 21, 2020

Defendant appeared to suggest in the trial court that once this immunity of the governmental entity was established, so long as Defendant was acting in the scope of his employment, he enjoyed the same immunity. … As such, the Tennessee Supreme Court has clearly held that “the immunity afforded governmental entities [under section 29-20-205] does not extend to the -5- employee.”

Hanley v. City of New York

139 A.D.3d 800 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 11, 2016

After discovery, the City moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, arguing that it did not have prior written notice of the alleged roadway defect, that it was entitled to qualified immunity for its highway planning … The City also established, prima facie, insofar as relevant here, that it did not cause or create the alleged defect through an affirmative act of negligence, because the alleged defect was caused over time by erosion and

Town of Flower Mound, Texas, Harlan Jefferson, Town Manager and Charles Springer, Assistant Town Manager/Chief Financial Officer v. Rembert Enterprises, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) · Mar 1, 2012

When a governmental entity such as Flower Mound enters into a contract, it waives immunity from liability but does not waive immunity from suit unless the legislature has clearly and unambiguously waived the governmental … sought would have the effect of establishing a right to relief against the governmental entity for which governmental immunity has not been waived.

City of Ames, Texas v. City of Liberty, Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) · Feb 23, 2023

at issue here clearly call for the provision of goods and services to a local government entity, as explicitly contemplated in the statute.”) … Even assuming without deciding that the Contract at issue in this case only required a passive receipt by Liberty, we do not agree that Lewis dictates the services provided here do not qualify as “services” under 271.151

Combs v. Texas Civil Rights Project

410 S.W.3d 529 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Aug 29, 2013

When sovereign immunity is clearly implicated, it is reasonable to require that a petitioner’s Rule 202 pleadings demonstrate that he is potentially entitled to some type of relief that would not be barred by sovereign immunity … While government employees may, under certain circumstances, be entitled to "official immunity,” such immunity is an affirmative defense, and the burden is on the government employee to establish all elements of the defense

Redmond v. Commonwealth

194 A.3d 229 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 26, 2018

Instead, the ECMS Contract 17657 cited by Redmond clearly provides that the agreement is between “the City of Philadelphia Department of Streets of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia County, hereinafter called … In its Rule 1925(a) opinion, the trial court outlined the evidence of record that could establish a prima facie case of negligence against the SEPTA bus driver.

Barry v. Turek

218 Cal. App. 3d 1241 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 20, 1990

As such, she was within the group of women to. whom Jan had daily access and was clearly part of an identifiable group of potential victims. … In sum, because Jan’s conduct in the hospital prior to the assaults on appellant did not constitute a “serious threat of physical violence” for the purposes of establishing an exception to the immunity provided by Civil Code

In re Rouss

162 A.D. 496 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 15, 1914

Such *502 an act clearly tended to pervert or obstruct the administration of justice and the due administration of the law. … his testimony for the People would render him immune.

Socomet, Inc. v. City of Detroit Socomet, Inc.

33 Mich. App. 626 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 20, 1971

Therefore, it was claimed exempt or immune under Article I, § 10, cl 2, of the Constitution of the United States. … Maryland, supra, it has become well-established that imports lose their constitutional immunity when the importer (1) sells them or (2) ‘breaks up the packages’ or (3) puts them to the use for which they were imported.

Donahue v. Justice Court

15 Cal. App. 3d 557 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 24, 1971

The property rights of the Hoopa Indian Tribe were established by the Executive Order of President Ulysses S. Grant on June 23, 1876. … United States, 228 U.S. 243 [ 57 L.Ed. 820 , 33 S.Ct. 449 ], for historical background of establishment of the Hoopa Reservation.)

Eagan v. Chicago Transit Authority

240 Ill. App. 3d 784 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 23, 1992

Section 4 — 102 of the Act reads: “Neither a local public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to establish a police department or otherwise provide police protection service or, if police protection service … Thus, plaintiff’s complaint clearly meets requirements (1) and (2) above, since it alleges that defendant was both aware of the danger and failed to respond to it.

Marvin v. Board of Education

Connecticut Appellate Court · Jul 9, 2019

of governmental immunity. … [W]hether a partic- ular plaintiff comes within a cognizable class of foresee- able victims for purposes of this narrowly drawn exception to qualified immunity ultimately is a question of law for the courts, in that it is

Steve Dann and Wife Diana Dann v. Athens Municipal Water Authority

Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler) · Aug 31, 2007

The doctrine of sovereign immunity has two components —immunity from suit and immunity from liability. Tex. Dep’t of Transp. v. Jones , 8 S.W.3d 636, 638 (Tex. 1999). … “A party suing a governmental entity must establish the state’s consent, which may be alleged either by reference to a statute or to express legislative permission.” Jones , 8 S.W.3d at 638 .

Dominguez v. Babcock

696 P.2d 338 · Colorado Court of Appeals · Feb 4, 1985

I The Colorado Governmental Immunity Act requires a claimant to provide the public entity with written notice of claims within 180 days after the date of the discovery of the injury. … This contention is without merit since plaintiff concedes that a qualified privilege is attached to this document.