Case law

Morway v. Durkin, 07-Ma-189 (2-23-2009)

2009 Ohio 932 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 23, 2009

The court noted that "the Ohio legislature clearly provided for waiver of federal causes of action, as well as causes of action based upon state law." … Harmony (C.A.6, 1995), 65 F.3d 1314 , 1318 (R.C. 2743.02 [A][1] clearly provides for waiver of federal causes of action). {¶ 38} In sum, by taking the state's offer of waiver of sovereign immunity and suing in the Court of

J.W. v. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 10 of DEWEY COUNTY

2021 OK CIV APP 34 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 12, 2021

In this context, the word "law" clearly refers to any legislative enactment. The statute also defines "law" to include any "written policy." 51 O.S.2011 § 155(4). … Nonetheless, those cases establish a general principle.

Debruhl v. Mecklenburg Cnty. Sheriff's Office

259 N.C. App. 50 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 17, 2018

Man being what he is cannot safely be trusted with complete immunity from outward responsibility in depriving others of their rights. . . . … The State is not “immune from the historic requirements of fairness - 16 -  DEBRUHL V.

Dobransky, E. v. EQT Production

273 A.3d 1133 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 11, 2022

The certified record clearly indicates that at Scotts Run HESI was responsible for “mud services” which included, inter alia, maintaining an inventory of barite. … Accordingly, EQT is similarly entitled to statutory employer immunity under Section 302(a)(2).

People v. Carreon

162 Ill. App. 3d 990 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 13, 1987

Shortly thereafter, Carreon also exited the establishment and went over to the blue car, asked the victims for a ride, and yelled to Amaya to join him. … Thus a witness, knowing that his own guilt is detected, may seek to shield himself from punishment by purchasing immunity or leniency by falsely accusing others and procuring their conviction.

Bombard v. Amica Mutual Insurance

11 A.D.3d 647 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 25, 2004

The party asserting the privilege provided by CPLR 3101 (d) bears the burden of demonstrating that the material it seeks to withhold is immune from discovery (see Koump v Smith, 25 NY2d 287, 294 [1969]) by identifying the … The language of that letter, as well as the subsequent disclaimer letter, clearly *649 established that the defendant’s investigation of the incident and the facts related to the plaintiffs notice of the incident was ongoing

Certain v. Equitable Equipment Co.

453 So. 2d 292 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 6, 1984

Appealing, plaintiff contends that defendants cannot invoke the tort immunity of LSA-R.S. 23:1032 [2] as "principals" or "statutory employers" of plaintiff since the evidence did not establish that he was injured while doing … The "stockholder" immunity of LSA-R.S. 23:1032 clearly applies to them.

GEORGIA DIVISON, SONS OF CONFEDERATE VETERANS, INC. v. BRYAN A. DOWNS, IN HIS OFFICAL CAPACITY AS CITY ATTORNEY OF THE CITY OF DECATUR

Court of Appeals of Georgia · Feb 23, 2024

In Sons of Confederate Veterans II, the Supreme Court addressed what it identified as “a discrete and important threshold question: whether the Georgia Constitution requires a plaintiff to establish some cognizable injury … immunity are not favored.”

Vare Bros. v. Commonwealth

43 Pa. Commw. 582 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 28, 1979

Defendant established that a settlement had been made in the third party action for the gross amount of $60,000.00. 4. … In the instant case the employer has clearly failed to meet its burden.

Gregory Allen Marlowe v. Southwest Virginia Regional Jail Authority

Court of Appeals of Virginia · Jul 30, 2024

[Bing] was clearly confined.” … The Security Center is clearly such a facility, and it was there that she was clearly confined. 283 Va. at 387.

Gables Constr., Inc. v. Red Coats, Inc.

241 Md. App. 1 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 10, 2019

evidence establishing that GCI breached the standard of care. … In some cases, the contract may clearly express an intended third party beneficiary, see Schlicht v.

Cuellar v. City of San Antonio

821 S.W.2d 250 · Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) · Oct 9, 1991

We will, therefore, not address the issue of immunity which everyone agrees is now irrelevant. … prior judgment and pleading of *257 the prior suit, and failed to establish that the judgment was final.

State v. AUGUSTIN M.

133 N.M. 636 · New Mexico Court of Appeals · Apr 21, 2003

Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 530 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) (holding that a denial of qualified immunity on a § 1983 claim is final and appeal-able under the collateral order doctrine). … Our Supreme Court addressed the question whether it had jurisdiction to immediately review the order denying qualified immunity. Carrillo, 114 N.M. at 612-13 , 845 P.2d at 135-36 .

Rivera v. Prince George's County Health Department

102 Md. App. 456 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 2, 1994

The 1981 version of the Act contained a limited waiver of the State’s sovereign immunity in certain tort actions to the extent of coverage by a program of insurance established by the State Treasurer. … is a clearly defined specific duty within the general duty of due care....

In Re MJS

903 A.2d 1 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 2006

in order to so qualify Madison. … Clearly, the reasoning of S.A.J. applies.

County of Allegheny v. Fedunok

164 Pa. Commw. 198 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · May 19, 1994

“[W]e note that summary judgment is only appropriate when, after examining the record in favor of the nonmoving party, there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant clearly establishes its entitlement to judgment … We hold, as a matter of law, based on these undisputed facts, that the diving board is personalty and that the real property exception to governmental immunity does not apply.

DOCTORS'CO. INS. SERVICES v. Superior Court

225 Cal. App. 3d 1284 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 3, 1990

Blaine and others, which would, if disclosed, establish the liability of Blaine. … Unruh is distinguishable, because it held the carrier’s conduct took it outside the immunity.

Velez v. City of New York

157 A.D.2d 370 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 24, 1990

Clearly, defendant was urging the court to submit the question of a special relationship to the jury. … On appeal, it takes that argument several steps further by urging that the assessment of danger is itself a matter of police judgment and discretion immune from judicial second-guessing, and also that other considerations

Caruso v. Abbott

133 Cal. App. 2d 304 · California Court of Appeal · May 27, 1955

These allegations are somewhat qualified, and they lack the directness and precision which is to be expected in pleading. … Clearly that has ceased with the coroner’s retirement, and there is no field for the necessarily prospective operation of an injunction.

Iovino v. State

228 Mich. App. 125 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 17, 1998

Plaintiff has presented evidence to establish that the traffic signals at the intersection of Dixie Highway and Watkins Lake Road may not have been properly positioned or programmed to ameliorate the hazard of an oncoming … Clearly, then, the mdot actually exercised control over the area in question and must be perceived to have jurisdiction over this spot pursuant to the conception of jurisdiction as used in the statute.