Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
B312660
|
Silva v. Langford
California Highway Patrol was not immune to liability for injuries caused by CHP sergeant responding to emergency call because the Vehicle Code provides a separate statutory basis for CHP liability. |
Immunity |
|
G. Feuer | Jun. 10, 2022 |
20-17053
|
Andrews v. City of Henderson
Officers were not entitled to qualified immunity when the officers tackled a non-resisting suspect that they knew was not armed. |
Immunity |
|
D. Forrest | May 24, 2022 |
H048486
|
Modification: County of Santa Clara v. Superior Court (Doctors Medical Center of Modesto)
Under Government Code Section 815, county was immune from noncontracting hospitals' claims for emergency service reimbursement because the alleged breach was based in tort rather than contract. |
Immunity |
|
A. Grover | May 23, 2022 |
E077884
|
County of San Bernardino v. Superior Court (The Red Brennan Group)
County was immune from liability when group spent more than $250,000 obtaining more signatures than needed after the County misrepresented the number of signatures needed for initiative to qualify to be on a ballot. |
Immunity |
|
C. Codrington | Apr. 29, 2022 |
H048486
|
County of Santa Clara v. Superior Court (Doctors Medical Center of Modesto)
Under Government Code Section 815, county was immune from noncontracting hospitals' claims for emergency service reimbursement because the alleged breach was based in tort rather than contract. |
Immunity |
|
A. Grover | Apr. 28, 2022 |
20-1566
|
Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Foundation
District court must apply the California choice-of-law provision since a foreign instrumentality, when not immune, is liable in the same manner and extent as an individual under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. |
Immunity |
|
E. Kagan | Apr. 22, 2022 |
F079926
|
Cleveland v. Taft Union High School Dist.
School district was vicariously liable for injuries sustained by student because district's threat assessment team's acts and omissions fell outside the immunity provided for mental examinations. |
Immunity |
|
D. Franson | Mar. 28, 2022 |
20-56255
|
Mohammad v. General Consulate of the State of Kuwait
Consulate did not have sovereign immunity because the commercial activity exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act applied to plaintiff secretary, whose duties were not peculiar to sovereigns. |
Immunity |
|
C. Callahan | Mar. 18, 2022 |
B303504
|
Mubanda v. City of Santa Barbara
Absent any applicable exceptions, a city was entitled to governmental immunity from liability for the death of an individual who died while engaged in the hazardous recreational activity of paddleboarding. |
Immunity |
|
S. Perren | Jan. 26, 2022 |
20-36066
|
Bird v. Oregon Commission for the Blind
The court determined a prior holding was no longer binding authority and found that, without an express statutory waiver of sovereign immunity, litigants could not recover compensatory damages or fees and costs. |
Immunity |
|
R. Collins | Jan. 10, 2022 |
20-35868
|
Esquivel v. U.S.
Communications between the fire specialist and land owner regarding fire suppression operations fell under the discretionary function exception, making the United States immune from suit. |
Immunity |
|
R. Tallman | Dec. 20, 2021 |
21-463
|
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson
Pre-enforcement challenge to a law seeking equitable relief was appropriate as to officials vested with the authority to enforce parts of the challenged state law. |
Immunity |
|
N. Gorsuch | Dec. 13, 2021 |
C089344
|
Modification: Acres v. Marston
In a suit involving Indian tribes' employees, sovereign immunity did not apply because plaintiff sought monetary relief from the employees in their individual capacities. |
Immunity |
|
C. Blease | Dec. 13, 2021 |
20-36073
|
Saved Magazine v. Spokane Police Department
A police officer was entitled to qualified immunity because plaintiff journalist did not identify a clearly established right that the officer violated. |
Immunity |
|
M. Smith | Dec. 10, 2021 |
C089344
|
Acres v. Marston
In a suit involving Indian tribes' employees, sovereign immunity did not apply because plaintiff sought monetary relief from the employees in their individual capacities. |
Immunity |
|
C. Blease | Nov. 22, 2021 |
20-16408
|
WhatsApp Inc. v. NSO Group Technologies
A corporation was not entitled to the protection of foreign sovereign immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act. |
Immunity |
|
D. Forrest | Nov. 9, 2021 |
20-15959
|
Acres Bonusing Inc. v. Marston
Tribal sovereign immunity did not apply because plaintiff sought money damages from the defendants in their individual capacities. |
Immunity |
|
D. Bress | Nov. 8, 2021 |
20-35598
|
DePaul Industries v. Miller
Because there was no clearly established property interest in renewable city contracts under an Oregon statute, an assistant city attorney was entitled to qualified immunity. |
Immunity |
|
L. VanDyke | Sep. 29, 2021 |
C092087
|
Dept. of Water Resources Cases
A reference to an administrative bulletin in the Water Code did not expand the Legislature's waiver of sovereign immunity. |
Immunity |
|
E. Duarte | Sep. 24, 2021 |
C092293
|
City of Chico v. Superior Court
Government Code Section 831.2 provided governmental immunity to city when 130-year-old tree's branch that predated city's park fell on plaintiff. |
Immunity |
|
W. Murray | Sep. 1, 2021 |
20-55295
|
Lemmon v. Snap, Inc.
Social media provider not entitled to immunity under Communications Decency Act because plaintiffs sought to hold provider liable for negligent design and did not treat provider as publisher or speaker. |
Immunity |
|
K. Wardlaw | May 5, 2021 |
B294531
|
Reed v. City of Los Angeles
City was protected by trail immunity doctrine because badminton net stretched across trail created dangerous condition that was inherently connected to the trail. |
Immunity |
|
V. Chaney | Mar. 4, 2020 |
18-15691
|
Amended Opinion: Walden v. State of Nevada
State that removes case to federal court waives immunity from suit on all federal-law claims, including those that Congress failed to apply to states through unequivocal and valid abrogation of Eleventh Amendment immunity. |
Immunity |
|
A. Tashima | Dec. 24, 2019 |
18-15691
|
Walden v. State of Nevada
State that removes case to federal court waives immunity from suit on all federal-law claims, including those that Congress failed to apply to states through unequivocal and valid abrogation of Eleventh Amendment immunity. |
Immunity |
|
A. Tashima | Oct. 17, 2019 |
18-15175
|
Dyroff v. The Ultimate Software Group
Website operator was fully immune from liability because it did not publish its own content, published users' posts without materially contributing to them, and owed no duty to plaintiff's deceased son. |
Immunity |
|
D. Nelson | Aug. 21, 2019 |
17-1299
|
Franchise Tax Bd. of California v. Hyatt
States retain their sovereign immunity from private suits brought in courts of other States; thus, 'Nevada v. Hall' was overruled, and California Tax Board was immune from respondent's suit in Nevada. |
Immunity |
|
C. Thomas | May 14, 2019 |
17-1201
|
Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority
16 U.S.C. Section 831c(b) is not subject to a discretionary function exception, and the Tennessee Valley Authority may generally be sued for personal injury claims. |
Immunity |
|
E. Kagan | Apr. 30, 2019 |
17-16283
|
James Steinle v. City and County of San Francisco
Negligence claim against City regarding woman shot and killed by undocumented alien with criminal record was barred; policy change of providing information to ICE was discretionary act insulated from liability. |
Immunity |
|
M. Bennett | Mar. 26, 2019 |
17-1011
|
Jam v. International Finance Corp.
The International Organizations Immunities Act grants international organizations the 'same immunity' from suit 'as foreign governments;' thus, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act governed the immunity of respondent. |
Immunity |
|
J. Roberts | Feb. 28, 2019 |
16-16975
|
E.V. v. Robinson
Military judge's evidentiary ruling was allegedly a 'mistake of fact or law' and not beyond his authority; thus appellant's non-constitutional claims were 'against the government' and barred by sovereign immunity. |
Immunity |
|
R. Paez | Oct. 18, 2018 |