Case law

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,

Kempen v. Town of Middletown

Superior Court of Rhode Island · Jan 15, 2010

Consequently, when operating in their legislative roles, Council members are *Page 10 entitled to absolute immunity. Here, however, Defendants are clearly not proposing, passing, or voting on any piece of legislation. … Qualified Privilege Defendants are entitled to a qualified privilege.

Edwards v. Ritchie

173 So. 2d 497 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 17, 1965

We conclude that the lower court was justified in determining that there was no conflict of evidence; and, that whether or not the defendant was a subcontractor and consequently immune from suit as a third party tort-feasor … And, as heretofore noted, if there was no liability as an employer under the Act, there was no immunity from suit as a third-party tort-feasor.

Freedman v. City of Oak Park

170 Mich. App. 349 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 12, 1988

Moreover, the roof of the park bench shelter was clearly not designed for being climbed upon, as Moshe Freedman was allegedly doing in this case. … Defendant, on the other hand, argues that plaintiff failed to plead sufficient facts to establish an intentional nuisance claim.

Tasha Davis v. Jones County School District

193 So. 3d 653 · Court of Appeals of Mississippi · Dec 1, 2015

It is well-established under Mississippi law that “[a] duty is discretionary when it is not imposed by law and depends upon the judgment or choice of the government entity or its employee.” J.S. v. Lamar Cnty. … And clearly, the converse must be true, such that narrower duties encompassed in a broad discretionary function may be rendered ministerial through statute or regulation.

Prejean v. Maintenance Enterprises, Inc.

2008 La.App. 4 Cir. 0364 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 25, 2009

The contractual language is clearly and unambiguously regulating the rights and responsibilities of the statutory and direct employers as between themselves, which is permissible. … Unlike the instant case, the contract in Smith did not establish a payment regime to the injured worker which is contrary to law.

Huffman v. INDIANA DEPT. OF ENVIR. MAN.

788 N.E.2d 505 · Indiana Court of Appeals · May 19, 2003

clearly suggested that intent. [3] *509 Because the legislature already has defined who qualifies for administrative review, it was error for the OEA to read into the phrase "aggrieved or adversely affected" a common law … or adversely affected" person merely by establishing that she is a citizen of the State of Indiana.

Jamgotchian v. Slender

170 Cal. App. 4th 1384 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 9, 2009

“On the other hand, we have concluded that the discretionary act statute does immunize officials and agencies against claims that they unreasonably delayed regulations under which a murdered security guard might have qualified … The undisputed facts do not establish that Slender was entitled to the protection of quasi-judicial immunity if he committed a trespass to chattels. III.

Commonwealth v. Fenwick

177 Ky. 685 · Court of Appeals of Kentucky · Nov 13, 1917

Conrad nor Will Conrad signed the note is thoroughly established, but that the names signed to the note were crude efforts to forge their names to the note is equally well established, as is the fact that the defendant uttered … This evidence clearly authorized the submission of the case to the jury, and the court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant.

Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners v. Gene Giggleman, DVM

408 S.W.3d 696 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 22, 2013

Gov’t Code § 552.301(b), such failure did not automatically require it to release the information because the confidentiality requirement imposed by Occupations Code section 807.027(b) would, if established, constitute a … immunity, see City of El Paso v.

Nihiser v. Hocking Cty. Bd. of Commrs.

2013 Ohio 3849 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 30, 2013

. {¶12} Once immunity is generally established, “the second tier of analysis is whether any of the five exceptions to immunity in subsection (B) apply.” Id. at ¶ 12. … Clearly, boards of county commissioners are given the authority to perform this function.

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

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.

City of Houston, Texas v. Patti Gonzales

Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · May 27, 2021

As such, the City established that it owed no duty to Gonzales. … Because the City established that it owed Gonzales no duty, the City retained its governmental immunity from suit. See Page, 701 S.W.2d at 834; see also Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 101.021(2).

Waugh v. City of Dallas

814 S.W.2d 492 · Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · Sep 11, 1991

Thus, the defendant can prevail by conclusively establishing against the plaintiff at least one factual element of each theory pleaded by the plaintiff, Gibbs v. … General Motors Corp., 450 S.W.2d 827, 828 (Tex.1970), or by conclusively establishing every factual element of an affirmative defense. Swilley v. Hughes, 488 S.W.2d 64, 67 (Tex.1972).

State v. Brooks

763 P.2d 707 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 14, 1988

The United States Supreme Court has clearly espoused its view of states’ attempts to impose their taxes on Indians: [I]n the special area of state taxation, absent cession of jurisdiction or other federal statutes permitting … Examples of those situations in which a state would be authorized to assert jurisdiction over otherwise immune tribal activities are found in Moe v.

Bagheri v. Montgomery County

180 Md. App. 93 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 6, 2008

ANALYSIS It is established Maryland common law that [a] “local governmental entity is liable for its torts if the tortious conduct occurs while the entity is acting in a private or proprietary capacity, but, unless its immunity … Clearly, the City would have been liable to suit if its negligent maintenance of the driveway had led to the injury of the truck drivers who used it to pick up trash and *100 garbage from the rear of the school, of the operators

University of Houston Main Campus v. Steve Simons

Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · Oct 24, 2002

Generally, a party seeking redress for breach of contract can establish legislative consent to sue by bringing suit under a special statute or obtaining a legislative resolution. Little Tex , 39 S.W.3d at 596 ; see Tex. … Neither the DTPA nor the Debt Collection Act clearly and unambiguously provides for a waiver of immunity from suit for governmental units.

John Klumb, Veronica McClelland, Vivian Montejano, John Gonzalez, Anita Robles, Charmaine Pilgrim, and the City of Houston v. Houston Municipal Employees Pension System, Barbara Chellette, David L. Long, Leonard Polk, Roy Sanchez, and Lonnie Vara

Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · May 23, 2013

Article 6243h of the Texas Revised Civil Statutes established HMEPS. See TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. … To qualify as a “governmental plan” under 26 U.S.C. § 401(a), the plan must be established and maintained for the employees of a political subdivision of a state or its agencies or instrumentalities.

McDaniel v. Welsh

234 So. 2d 833 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 13, 1970

The record does not establish the precise cause of the light's failure. … The burden is on plaintiff to establish his case by a preponderance of evidence.