Case law

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 .

Kaufmann v. Jersey Community Hospital

396 Ill. App. 3d 729 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 8, 2009

Act (Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/8— 101(a) (West 2006)). … Schroeder’s alleged act of licking plaintiffs breast was clearly unrelated to her patient care.

Dann v. Auburn Police Department

138 A.D.3d 1468 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 29, 2016

Although prosecutors are afforded only qualified immunity when acting in an investigative capacity (see Buckley, 509 US at 275-276 ; Kirchner, 107 AD3d at 1623; Claude H. v County of Oneida, 214 AD2d 964, 965 [1995]), we … It is well established that “ ‘information provided by an identified citizen accusing another of a crime is legally sufficient to provide the police with probable cause to arrest’ ” (Lyman, 74 AD3d at 1843 ; see Zetes, 108

State ex rel. Slacas v. KCI Technologies, Inc.

2022 Ohio 4573 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 2022

This intent was clearly stated and shown in the MFS report but did not occur in the design and construction of the new Subdivision storm drainage system. … . {¶27} Thus, it is established that the Portage County defendants are entitled to immunity except to the extent that they may be liable for failing to maintain, i.e., keep free of obstruction and deterioration,

Jilani ex rel. Jilani v. Jilani

747 S.W.2d 504 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 16, 1988

was a good and useful one, the experience of the law would empirically establish the wisdom of that doctrine. … If the Court really feels that it is necessary and proper that changes should be made in the definition and extent of the doctrine of parental immunity, it is in a position to do so, and may do so in such a manner as to clearly

Robison v. Dana Corp.

656 N.E.2d 540 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 24, 1995

He did not establish whether the applicants may or may not have been one of a group of many qualified applicants, and generally failed to establish any evidence supporting a theory of disparate impact on the part of Dana … Evidence was presented establishing that Dana hired at least as many qualified disabled applicants as it did not hire qualified disabled applicants.

DARRICK WASHINGTON v. BLACK LAWYERS FOR JUSTICE

District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 4, 2022

immunity. … They thus contended the deputy would have been entitled to qualified immunity and “there is no likelihood that Washington would have succeeded [on the merits] in the federal court lawsuit [they had drafted and endeavored

Ives v. State

993 So. 2d 117 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 22, 2008

Several appellate decisions have suggested that errors in the procedures used to establish a defendant qualifies for enhanced sentencing, while not cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion, "must be" raised in a rule 3.850 motion … Because the state would be permitted to properly establish the release date should resentencing be required, Ives is not prejudiced by the procedural deficiency unless he does not in fact qualify for the PRR sanction.

Dixon v. Holden

923 S.W.2d 370 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 12, 1996

Kirby, Note, Qualified Immunity For Civil Rights Violations: Refining The Standard, 75 CORNELL L.Rev. 462, 486 (1990). The narrow question is most readily answered. … SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY The respondents argue that the present suit violates sovereign immunity.

Davis v. Hennepin County

559 N.W.2d 117 · Court of Appeals of Minnesota · Feb 11, 1997

The determination of what response is appropriate clearly involves the judgment and discretion of the official making the determination. See McNabb v. … Aiding and abetting under the MHRA is established by a showing that the defendant “[ijntentionally * * * aid[ed], abet[ted], incite[d], compelled], or coeree[d] a person to engage in any of the practices forbidden by [the

Ann Rosenberg v. KIPP, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Feb 2, 2015

Rosenberg was replaced.2 Therefore, to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination, she must show these four elements. … Nor does KIPP dispute that Rosenberg was qualified for her employment position or that KIPP terminated her employment, or that Rosenberg was replaced by someone younger.

Fort Bend Independent School District v. Christopher Moore

Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · Dec 31, 2020

from suit absent an express waiver of governmental immunity. … Garcia, 253 S.W.3d 653, 660 (Tex. 2008) (chapter 21 “clearly and unambiguously waives immunity”).

James v. Ohio Edison Co.

2025 Ohio 1046 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 26, 2025

, he will have ample time to prepare for trial on the immunity issue. … As noted above, both the Supreme Court of Ohio and this Court have previously established that a trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to amend when an untimely motion offers no reason to justify

McDermott v. TENDUN CONSTRUCTORS, ROHR INDUSTRIES, INC.

211 N.J. Super. 196 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 17, 1986

With respect to Knight, we conclude that summary judgment grounded upon governmental immunity was properly denied since the record clearly indicates that this entity was fully responsible for planning and designing all aspects … Although Knight clearly was not entitled to summary judgment based upon governmental immunity, we find that the trial *208 court properly granted it summary judgment on the alternate ground that plaintiff had failed to make

Sheldon Johnson v. Price Omondi

Court of Appeals of Georgia · Nov 27, 2012

The trial court had previously ruled that the Johnson’s medical experts were qualified to give opinion testimony in this case, and thus, their testimony was admissible under OCGA § 24-9- 67.1. … App. at 83-86 (1) (a), (b), and the parties did not raise the issue of immunity under OCGA § 51-1-29.5 (c).

State Ex Rel. Ross v. Anderson

31 Ind. App. 34 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Apr 22, 1903

the privileges and immunities must be regarded as agreeing and obligating themselves to conform to the conditions and limitations expressed or fairly implied. … They must be reasonable, and “must not interfere with the vested and substantial rights of the stockholders ; and they must not be contrary to public policy or the established law of the land.”

City of Gary v. Conat

810 N.E.2d 1112 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 2004

A judgment is clearly erroncous when a review of the record leaves us with the firm conviction that a mistake has been made. Id. … Our investigation into Co-nat's Complaint establishes that he conceded that Calo acted within the scope of his employment.

Department of Transp. v. Webb

409 So. 2d 1061 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 17, 1981

Clearly, if the interplay between comparative negligence and the contribution statute was workable in 1975, it is even more workable now. … Finally, the Department of Transportation contends it should have been declared immune from tort liability in this case because the installation of warning devices *1064 and the establishment of an adequate line of sight

Booth v. Lazzara

2026 Ohio 225 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 26, 2026

In other words, a treating psychiatrist merely alleging "good faith" is generally insufficient to establish the affirmative defense of immunity; good faith must be sufficiently demonstrated by all the surrounding circumstances … This is established when considering the depositions and records submitted by Brandi combined with Dr.

Callaway v. State

251 Ga. App. 11 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · Jul 31, 2001

Dextrell Callaway filed a direct appeal from an order denying his plea in bar and demand for acquittal based on the denial of his constitutional right to a speedy trial under the analysis established in Barker v. … Giles, 264 Ga. 812, 813 (1) ( 450 SE2d 421 ) (1994) (rejecting application of the collateral order doctrine to orders denying claims of qualified immunity in a 42 USC § 1983 action); see also Waldrip v.