Case law

Idris v. Marion County Assessor

12 N.E.3d 331 · Indiana Tax Court · Jun 4, 2014

The Court will reverse a final determination of the Indiana Board if it is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … Finally, the Marion County Tax Reports and real estate listings upon which Kamenova relied not only overtly qualified their own accuracy but also indicated that only one of the three units was larger than Kamenova’s property

Barlow v. Ohio State Univ. Med. Ctr.

2010 Ohio 4305 · Ohio Court of Claims · Aug 13, 2010

Sharp’s position as an assistant professor at OSUMC qualifies as state employment, the issue before the court is whether Dr. Sharp was engaged in the education of residents at the time of the alleged negligence. … . {¶ 12} Plaintiff asserts that Barlow’s testimony established that the discharge instructions were provided by a nurse who was neither a student nor a resident and, for that reason, Dr.

Hill v. Stubhub, Inc.

2011 NCBC 7 · North Carolina Business Court · Feb 28, 2011

It is not entitled to immunity. It does not qualify as a Good Samaritan. … The facts set out above clearly establish that StubHub’s actions were “in and affecting commerce” as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1. {53} There are class action issues remaining to be decided.

Estate of Muscle v. Director

26 N.J. Tax 192 · New Jersey Tax Court · Nov 30, 2011

To the contrary, the sequence of events establish that it was only after Jackson met with Mr. … Rather, it only evidenced “an intent to preserve the decedent’s assets and estate for her heirs and clearly constitutes a testamentary disposition.” Ibid.

2 Tudor City Place Associates v. Libyan Arab Republic Mission to U. N.

121 Misc. 2d 945 · Civil Court of the City of New York · Dec 5, 1983

The service here clearly failed to follow the FSIA. The affidavit describes the conspicuous posting and mailing provided for in RPAPL 735. … Here, that immunity cannot be established by the Mission.

Meyer Waste System, Inc. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue

741 N.E.2d 1 · Indiana Tax Court · Dec 7, 2000

Therefore, this Court holds that based upon established precedent, Meyer Waste owns the garbage that it hauls. B. … The facts clearly state that the stone was sold at Calcar’s Plant, not at the purchasers chosen delivery location.

Alfin v. State of New York

2023 NY Slip Op 23427 · New York Court of Claims · Dec 31, 2023

Indeed, it is well established that a police officer's pursuit of a motorist for a suspected traffic violation qualifies as an emergency operation ( see Thompson v City of New York , 210 AD3d 1031, 1033-1034 [2d Dept 2022 … Foster v Suffolk County Police Dept. , 137 AD3d 855, 857 [2d Dept 2016] [rejecting the municipal defendants' argument "that they are entitled to immunity outside of the qualified immunity granted by [VTL] § 1104"]; Santana

Greeno v. Ohio Dept. of Transp.

2012 Ohio 5274 · Ohio Court of Claims · Jul 5, 2012

. {¶7} It is well established that “[t]he state cannot be sued for its legislative or judicial functions or the exercise of an executive or planning function involving the making of a basic policy decision which … ODOT’s decision as to when to repair a particular roadway, or how to best utilize its resources is clearly a policy decision of such nature.

Kaso v. Ohio Department of Health

124 Ohio Misc. 2d 59 · Ohio Court of Claims · May 12, 2003

The court having found that defendant was not negligent in its placement of vaccine baits, it follows that plaintiffs cannot establish a prima-facie case of qualified nuisance. {¶ 29} Plaintiffs’ last theory of recovery is … Here, defendant clearly had lawful authority to conduct the ORV program.

Benick v. Dept. of Agriculture

2019 Ohio 5469 · Ohio Court of Claims · Dec 30, 2019

The court agrees. {¶7} “The Court of Claims Act, effective January 1, 1975, waived the state’s sovereign immunity and established the Court of Claims * * *.” Keller v. … monitoring, law enforcement, or emergency response activity * * *.” {¶10} Pursuant to R.C. 3717.11, defendant has a duty to conduct surveys of boards of health “for the purpose of determining whether the board is qualified

Lanesborough

1 Rep. Cont. El. 183 · Massachusetts House of Representatives · Jul 1, 1815

Nor does it very clearly appear, from any of the colony laws, how town meetings were warned. … But the legislature, under the last charter, incorporated several new towns, “ with all the powers, privileges and immunities of other towns, that of sending a representative to the general assembly only excepted.”

Center for Molecular Medicine & Immunology v. Township of Belleville

19 N.J. Tax 342 · New Jersey Tax Court · May 2, 2001

in the fashion the tax immunity was intended. … Thus, the GSCC is clearly operated in furtherance of a public purpose as specified by N.J.S.A. 54:4-3.3.

Knox County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals v. Grandview Care, Inc.

826 N.E.2d 177 · Indiana Tax Court · Apr 29, 2005

will reverse a final determination of the Indiana Board only if it is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … Probative evidence is evidence sufficient to establish a given fact that, if not contradicted, will remain sufficient. Id. at n. 4.

Weymouth Township v. Memorial Park Family Practice Center, Inc.

7 N.J. Tax 589 · New Jersey Tax Court · Jul 19, 1985

The above-quoted laws clearly establish that all real property within the jurisdiction of this State is presumed to be taxable. … If, before us, the taxing district on its appeal has the burden of proof it would be required to establish the non-existence of facts by a preponderance of the evidence that the property owner does not qualify under each

American Fire & Casualty Co. v. Director, Division of Taxation

21 N.J. Tax 155 · New Jersey Tax Court · Dec 2, 2003

In Kemp, supra, 147 N.J. 294 , 687 A.2d 715 , our Supreme Court found that a grant of immunity contained in the Tort Claims Act (TCA) was “clearly inconsistent” with a qualified immunity granted under N.J.S.A. 26:11-12. … Based on this analysis, the Court concluded that the Legislature did not intend that immunity from liability should depend on good faith and held that the general grant of good faith immunity in N.J.S.A. 26:11-12 was “irreconcilably

Mesivta Ohr Torah Lakewood v. Township of Lakewood

24 N.J. Tax 314 · New Jersey Tax Court · Dec 10, 2008

[I bid. 1 Once plaintiff establishes that the property is owned by an entity that operates a house of worship, plaintiff must establish four factors to qualify for the exemption: (1) the residence must be occupied as a parsonage … Justice (then Judge) Long reasoned that the property owner was not entitled to charitable immunity because it “was not created to lessen the burden on government” which ordinarily justifies the immunity “but to obtain as

Smith Kline & French v. State Tax Commission

1 Or. Tax 532 · Oregon Tax Court · Apr 24, 1964

A corporation qualified to do business in Oregon pays a certain amount of excise tax. … Furthermore, by prohibiting certain state taxation Congress creates an exemption or immunity, not merely a regulation.

Waterman v. State

35 Misc. 2d 954 · New York Court of Claims · Aug 29, 1962

Div. 443 [1950]), cited in the Attorney-General’s brief is clearly distinguishable. There a City Judge issued a warrant without an infonnation being laid before him. … Practical common sense would seem to dictate that the result we have reached under established legal standards is a sound one.

Flanigan v. State

113 Misc. 91 · New York Court of Claims · Sep 15, 1920

By this section the state waives immunity and assumes liability for damages sustained by reason of the construction of its canals but provides that the state shall not be liable unless all the facts proved therein make out … a case which would create a legal liability against the state were the same established in evidence in a court of justice against an individual or corporation.

Methodist Hospitals, Inc. v. Lake County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals

862 N.E.2d 335 · Indiana Tax Court · Jan 10, 2007

The question before this Court is whether Methodist made a prima facie case that the PCAs qualify for a charitable purposes exemption. … DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS On appeal, Methodist maintains that the Indiana Board clearly erred in determining that the PCAs did not qualify for a charitable purposes exemption as they “[provide] primary care services as part