In 2000, two small planes collided while approaching the Waukegan Regional Airport, which is near Lake Michigan north of Chicago, and crashed into a medical center. The planes’ occupants— the pilot and passenger of one, the student pilot of the other—were killed, and the medical center was damaged. When the collision occurred, one plane was approaching the airport, intending to land, and the

{¶1} Plaintiff-appellant, Justin Mitchell, appeals the summary judgment entered by the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas in favor of defendantappellee, the city of Blue Ash, in a personal-injury action.

{¶2} On July 4, 2005, Mitchell went to a city park to watch a free fireworks display. A portion of the park property was enclosed by a fence, which had a gate that opened and closed

This is a consolidated appeal arising out of flooding on residential property located on Rathmor Road in the City of Bloomfield Hills. In Docket No. 275580, plaintiff Marilyn Froling Revocable Living Trust (the Froling Trust) appeals as of right from the trial court’s December 21, 2006 order granting the City of Bloomfield Hills (the City), Alan and Marilynne Kiriluk, Roger and Barbara Smith, an

Appellant Williamson County ("the County") brings this interlocutory appeal from the trial court's denial of its plea to the jurisdiction in a suit for property damages resulting from a collision between appellee Dan Voss's vehicle and a tractor owned and operated by the County. The County asserts on appeal that the trial court erred in denying its plea to the jurisdiction because there is no wai

In this premise-liability case, we decide whether a seventeen-foot floodgate arm located approximately three feet off a two-lane rural roadway is a “special defect� under the Texas Tort Claims Act (TTCA). We hold the floodgate arm does not meet the TTCA’s narrow definition of a special defect. Accordingly, we reverse the court of appeals’ judgment and dismiss the case.

“Sovereign immunity protects the State from lawsuits for money damages.� Tex. Nat. Res. Conservation Comm’n v. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d 849, 853 (Tex. 2002). But “an action to determine or protect a private party’s rights against a state official who has acted without legal or statutory authority is not a suit against the State that sovereign immunity bars.� Fed. Sign v. Tex. S. Univ., 951 S

When the government maintains a public nuisance that it knows is substantially certain to cause a specific injury to private property, it may be required by article I, section 17 of the Texas Constitution1 to provide adequate compensation for taking or damaging the property.2 The claim in this case is that benzene from a closed municipal waste disposal site migrated through the soil to a nearby ho

Plaintiff Lawrence B. Lockwood appeals from the orders granting special motions to strike his original complaint and first amended complaint under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (hereafter, section 425.16), and the judgment entered in favor of defendants Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton and Jonathan Hangartner (collectively, Sheppard Mullin). Hangartner individually cross-appeals from t

The common law principle of sovereign immunity, which holds that the state may not be sued without its consent, is well established in our jurisprudence. Lagassey v. State, 268 Conn. 723, 732, 846 A.2d 831 (2004). This immunity from suit implicates subject matter jurisdiction and, therefore, provides a basis for a court to grant a motion to dismiss. Id., 736. The immunity enjoyed by municipalities

Following our grant of certification,1 the plaintiff, Geraldine D. Lyon, appealed from the judgment of the Appellate Court affirming the judgment of the trial court, claming that the Appellate Court incorrectly interpreted General Statutes §§ 46a-60 and 46a- 70 as barring the plaintiff’s employment discrimination action under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. The defendants, the office of th

8 Ronnie Sledge appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern
9 District of New York (McAvoy, J.) granting Dr. Pang L. Kooi’s motion for summary judgment and
10 dismissing Sledge’s complaint raising claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Sledge’s complaint alleged
11 that Kooi had violated his Eighth Amendment rights while Sledge was incarcerated at the

In this consolidated appeal, the City of Orlando and Orange County, Florida, defendants below, timely challenge a summary final judgment ordering them to honor the terms of a purported contract to provide reclaimed water at no charge, for twenty years, to West Orange Country Club, plaintiff below. Because the purported contract was not approved by the governing boards of either Defendant, and was

Plaintiff Richard Robinson (“Robinson�), a sergeant with the Los Angeles County Office of Public Safety (“OPS�), filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the County of Los Angeles (“Los Angeles�) and several OPS officers (“Defendants�) alleging that he was denied promotion in violation of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights because he reported misconduct

Defendant Officer Brad Knoblauch appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for summary judgment. For the following reasons, we reverse.

I

On April 29, 2000, Officer Brad Knoblauch (“Knoblauch�) of the Holly Springs Police Department was on a routine late-night/early-morning patrol when he observed Roy Pasco (“Pasco�) driving erratically. Believing Pasco was intoxica

Donald E. Sable II alleges that the City Council of the City of Nichols Hills, Oklahoma, sought to condemn his property in retaliation for his having brought a successful quiet-title suit against the City. He sued the City and several councilors under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The councilors argued that legislative immunity protected them from suit. The district court disagreed and the councilors (Defend

At 11 p.m. on July 28, 2003, Richard Schiele was shot in his Kansas City home by two assailants. Schiele identified Ricardo Morris as one of the assailants to Police Officer Jarrett Lanpher. Based on this identification, and some corroboration by other witnesses, Lanpher obtained a warrant to search the nearby home where brothers Terrance and Ricardo Morris lived with their mother, Rosalind. The w

Mindy Kahle sued Jermaine Leonard (and others) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. A
jury found Leonard liable, awarding damages. Leonard appeals Batson and
evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, and the portion of the judgment (one percent)
applied to Kahle’s attorneys’ fees. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this
court affirms the verdict but remands for redetermination of t

Joseph Jaskolski and the National Insurance Crime Bureau (“NICB�) bring this interlocutory appeal from the trial court‟s denial of their Petition for Certification under the Federal Employees Liability Reform and Tort Compensation Act of 1998, commonly known as the Westfall Act. See 28 U.S.C. § 2679 (2009). The Westfall Act provides that the remedies available under the Federal Tort Claims

Plaintiff-Appellant Ginger Martinez, individually and on behalf of the estate of her father, Kenneth Wayne Ginn, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against the Board of County Commissioners of Cleveland County Oklahoma, Sheriff DeWayne Beggs, and Deputies Kevin Brandon, Tommy Edwards, David Epps, and Gilbert Kirkland alleging violations of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution f

Plaintiff Christopher Yancey appeals from a district court order applying the Younger1 abstention doctrine in dismissing his lawsuit against defendant Stephen Bonner, an Oklahoma state court judge who presided over the contested adoption of Yancey’s biological child. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and affirm.

Yancey, a member of the Muscogee (Creek) Indian Nation of Oklahom

Rhelda Hostetler seeks damages from Justin Green pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Mr. Green – a jailer at the Choctaw County jail – acted with deliberate indifference to her safety as an inmate by failing to protect her from sexual attack by another inmate. This, Ms. Hostetler asserts, resulted in a deprivation of constitutional rights guaranteed her by the Fourteenth Amendment. Be

Donald E. Sable II alleges that the City Council of the City of Nichols Hills, Oklahoma, sought to condemn his property in retaliation for his having brought a successful quiet-title suit against the City. He sued the City and several councilors under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The councilors argued that legislative immunity protected them from suit. The district court disagreed and the councilors (Defen

¶1 Dr. Scott A. Krasner, Terri Lee Krasner, and Scott A. Krasner, M.D., P.C. (together, “Krasnerâ€�) appeal the jury verdict in favor of William Ritchie, Darlene Ritchie, and Korbin Underwood (together, “Ritchiesâ€�). Krasner raises several issues on appeal. We hold that, even absent a formal doctor-patient relationship, a doctor conducting an Independent Medical Examination (“IMEâ€�) owes a

Sharry McDonald appeals the circuit court's judgment dismissing with prejudice her petition for damages for wrongful termination against the City of Kansas City, Missouri. The City filed a motion to dismiss, which the circuit court granted. McDonald contends that, because she filed a first amended petition for damages before a responsive pleading had been served, the original petition for damages

Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant Jonathan Lemery (“Lemery�) filed an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988 against Defendants-Appellants- Cross-Appellees officers Mark Beckner and Richard French and the City of Boulder (“Defendants�). Lemery alleged violations of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

After the district court granted summary judgment to Defendants o