Case law

Sommer v. STATE, DEPT. OF TRANSP. DEVELOPMENT

758 So. 2d 923 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 16, 2000

their actions were objectively reasonable, did not violate plaintiff's rights, and were thus protected by qualified and good faith immunity. … That portion of the Will opinion, when read in context as we are required to do, clearly and unequivocally applies only to cases brought in federal court, where 11th Amendment sovereign immunity is an issue.

Hall v. Louisiana

974 F. Supp. 2d 944 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Sep 30, 2013

The Legislature contends that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate claims brought against it, as the Legislature is entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity 17 , legislative immunity, and qualified immunity … “In other words, only legislative acts are entitled to absolute immunity, while non-legislative or administrative acts are only entitled to qualified immunity.” Bryan v.

INVESTMENT MGMT. SVCS., INC. v. Village of Folsom

808 So. 2d 597 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 11, 2001

Therefore, the Village of Folsom will be liable for damages under the civil rights statute only if it violated IMS's clearly established constitutional rights. … IMS has no clearly established constitutional right which has been violated.

Richie, Richie & Oberle, L.L.P. v. Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Ass'n

928 So. 2d 15 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 22, 2005

LIGA correctly counters that the blanket immunity found in LSA-R.S. 22:1391 is broader than that granted to the State and state agencies pursuant to LSA-R.S. 9:2798.1, which only provides qualified immunity for discretionary … These contractual relationships clearly do not encompass the selection of attorneys to represent LIGA. This argument is without merit.

Opinion Number

Louisiana Attorney General Reports · Aug 28, 2000

R.S. 42:1299.87 (B) clearly states that "before releasing confidential information the Secretary shall obtain an agreement in writing [that] shall indemnify the State of Louisiana." … States may enter into contractual endeavors without waiving sovereign immunity.

Cormier v. Guilbeaux

547 So. 2d 17 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 5, 1989

The trial court also found as an additional reason for Guilbeaux's dismissal from the suit that he qualified for shareholder immunity. … On this evidence, the facts necessary to establish Guilbeaux's immunity from tort liability have by no means been shown with the certainty required by La.C.C.P. arts. 966 and 967, for summary judgment purposes.

Leckelt v. Board of Commissioners of Hospital District No. 1

714 F. Supp. 1377 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Mar 15, 1989

The plaintiff must establish a pri-ma facie case by showing that he is a handicapped person within the meaning of the Act that he is qualified for employment at TGMC apart from his handicap and that he was discharged from … not otherwise qualified.

Fowler v. Roberts

556 So. 2d 1 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Feb 9, 1990

The literal words clearly cannot be followed, for they say that the government is not liable for abuse of discretion about how to drive a mail truck, and Congress clearly intended that the government should be liable for … That provision does not mandate the Department's establishing policies for allowing waivers.

Ussery v. Louisiana Ex Rel. Department of Health & Hospitals

962 F. Supp. 922 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Apr 25, 1997

Defendants assert that sovereign immunity bars pursuit of these claims in federal court. Plaintiff fails to rebut this argument. It is well established that the state is immune to state claims in federal court. … Title VII Retaliation Claim To establish her claim of retaliation in violation of Title VII, plaintiff must establish (1) that she engaged in a protected activity; (2) that she was subjected to an adverse employment action

Mouton v. Hebert's Superette, Inc.

10 La.App. 3 Cir. 787 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 8, 2010

This discussion clearly establishes that the doctrines of judicial and prosecutorial immunity do not function as affirmative defenses because they contribute to the definition of a cause of action rather than exempting certain … In the present case, the law of obligations and negotiable instruments clearly creates a cause of action under the circumstances described by Mouton’s petitions, and the immunity created by 26 U.S.C. § 3403 can only function

Price v. Exxon Corp.

95 La.App. 1 Cir. 0392 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 9, 1995

that it is clearly wrong or manifestly erroneous. … This court further held that allowing the State or its subdivisions to invoke the recreational use immunity did not violate the proscription against sovereign immunity because *1279 the statute was not designed to re-establish

Todd v. Angelloz

844 So. 2d 316 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 28, 2003

However, in order to establish a breach of the standard of care, Mr. … Todd's psychological condition pursuant to the court's order clearly involved a professional assessment of Mr. Todd's condition.

In re Chinese-Manufactured Drywall Products Liability Litigation

168 F. Supp. 3d 918 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Mar 10, 2016

There is clearly a significant relationship between CNBM Group and the other Chinese entities, including Taish-an. The question is whether this is sufficient to overcome the protection of immunity provided under FSIA. … NO STATUTORY EXCEPTION TO SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY APPLIES TO CNBM GROUP Under FSIA, a plaintiff can overcome a foreign state’s presumptive immunity from suit by establishing one of the statute’s exceptions to immunity.

Bradshaw v. STATE, DEPT. OF WILDLIFE & FISHERIES

616 So. 2d 799 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 31, 1993

Both defendants, claiming benefit of the qualified immunity afforded by the recreational use statute, LSA-R.S. 9:2795, excepted that plaintiff's petition failed to state a cause of action. … Yet, unlike the Keelen court, we are faced with a situation that clearly falls under the language of LSA-R.S. 9:2795 E.

Bougon v. Volunteers of America

151 So. 797 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 2, 1934

are immune from liability upon the ground of public policy and other reasons, but particularly because of what is known as the “Trust Fund Doctrine.” … Just a word about the Edwards Case, which, we are informed, has met with considerable criticism, as distinguished an authority as the Supreme Court of California having declared that it is clearly against the great weight

In Re Raspanti

8 So. 3d 526 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Mar 17, 2009

This court has recognized the difference between absolute immunity, which defeats a suit at the outset, and qualified immunity, which depends on circumstances and motivations and often must be established by evidence at trial … Respondent’s conduct clearly violated duties owed to the public, the legal system, and the profession.

Godfrey v. Boston Old Colony Ins. Co.

97 La.App. 4 Cir. 2568 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 27, 1998

However, in the rare cases which do not qualify for LSA-R.S. 9:2800.1 immunity because the alcoholic beverage vendor sold to a person under "the age for lawful purchase thereof," the court must move to the second level of … General negligence principles Because the immunity established by LSA-R.S. 9:2800.1 does not immunize Waldo's from liability under the facts of the instant case, we turn now to the second level of inquiry for determining

Rosen v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development

2001 La.App. 4 Cir. 0499 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 2002

If the employee had no discretion or choice as to appropriate conduct, there is no immunity. … This conclusion is not manifestly erroneous, clearly wrong, or wrong as a matter of law.

Deumite v. State

668 So. 2d 727 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Feb 28, 1996

The first limitation, upon the type of land or water bottom covered, was established in Keelen . … The language of this statute clearly gives the DWF the recreational immunity afforded to private landowners by La.R.S. 9:2795(33).

Dupre & Son Floor Covering, Inc. v. City of Iota

9 La.App. 3 Cir. 1183 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 5, 2010

Therefore, Iota contended, the officers and town were immune pursuant to La. … We need not determine that Iota is immune and that Iota negated one or more of the essential elements of tort; for Iota to prevail, we need only find that it is immune or that the essential elements of tort have been negated