Case law

Texas Department of Public Safety v. Merardo Bonilla

509 S.W.3d 570 · Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) · Oct 12, 2016

To answer that question, we focus on whether the Texas Department of Public Safety’s (DPS) summary judgment evidence conclusively establishes the “good faith” element for official immunity, and if so, whether the innocent … Had the Texas Supreme Court meant that none of the conflicting evidence which Bonilla brought forward plays into the good faith test, it could have clearly said so.

Tackett v. Pine Richland School District

793 A.2d 1022 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 14, 2002

Local government agencies are generally immune from tort liability. Section 8541 of the Judicial Code. This “governmental immunity,” however, is not absolute. … Summary judgment is only appropriate when, after examining the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, there is no genuine issue of material fact, and the moving party clearly establishes that he is entitled

American Honda Motor Co. v. City of Seattle

167 Wash. App. 578 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 2, 2012

The taxpayer has made a claim that some of their sales are not subject to the Seattle B&O tax because they qualify for an import exemption or deduction. … As soon as the journey began, tax immunity attached.” Wash.

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 .

Betts v. Department of Revenue

78 Ill. App. 3d 102 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 18, 1979

As such it is barred by sovereign immunity and was properly dismissed. II. … This extraordinary remedy will be granted only when the right to it is clearly established. (Parsons v. Walker (1975), 28 Ill. App. 3d 517 , 328 N.E.2d 920 .)

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

McMillan v. Westport Insurance

19 Mass. L. Rptr. 55 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Dec 12, 2004

Id. 4 Some courts grant absolute immunity to opinion work product but only qualified immunity to ordinary work product where a party may overcome the privilege by a showing of substantial need. … Even those courts that are reluctant to grant absolute immunity to opinion work product state that discovery of such materials may be granted in only rare situations.

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.

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.

Travis County, Texas v. Pelzel & Associates, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Oct 19, 2000

Hunt County , 249 S.W. 831, 835 (Tex. 1923) ("disallowance of the claim by [the commissioners] court clearly gives the right to bring suit"). … The concurring opinion today complains that the presentment statute does not clearly waive a county's immunity.

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.)

Higgins v. Board of Education

101 Ill. App. 3d 1003 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 17, 1981

Rather, two established teaching positions, one in French and one in English communications, were filled by nontenured teachers. The appellant was qualified to fill neither of these established positions. … That is clearly the law, but tenured teachers do not have the right to object to the incidental assignment of a single course to established teaching positions which they are unqualified to teach, thereby fractionalizing

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

Gilbert v. Case

3 A.D.2d 930 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 20, 1957

The opinion of the Special Term clearly indicates such an intent. … If appellant, a foreign corporation, were to be rendered immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of this State it would also be rendered immune in this State from the very expense for which the statutorily prescribed security

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.

People v. Martinez

62 Ill. App. 3d 7 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 13, 1978

According to McCabe, defendant was offered such immunity but rejected it. … Considered as a whole, the evidence adduced by the State clearly defined the means, opportunity and motive for the Raymond homicide and serves to establish defendant’s role therein.

Jones v. MetroHealth Med. Ctr.

2016 Ohio 4858 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 7, 2016

By Stewart’s reckoning, if the state has waived immunity from suit, political subdivisions can have no immunity of their own because their immunity is based on the state’s immunity. {¶12} Stewart’s argument is essentially … immune from civil liability is a question of law.

John Charles Alexander AKA Bobby Ray Miller v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jul 8, 2011

Sovereign immunity includes two distinct principles: immunity from suit and immunity from liability. Texas Dep’t of Parks & Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217, 224 (Tex. 2004) (citing Texas Dep’t of Transp. v. … Garcia, 253 S.W.3d 653, 660 (Tex. 2008) (agreeing that TCHRA “clearly and unambiguously waive[d] immunity”); see also Tex. Lab. Code Ann.