DiPino v. Davis

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that the requisite “malice, though a separate element of the tort, may be inferred from the lack of probable cause”
• stating that, where liability is derivative, \recovery may not be had against the entity if the employee is found not to be liable or is released\
• stating that, where liability is derivative, “recovery may not be had against the entity if the employee is found not to be liable or is released”
• explaining that where “a point germane to the appeal is not adequately raised” the appellate court should decline to address it
• stating that a “local governmental entity” is “immune from common law tort suits when engaged in governmental, as opposed to proprietary, acts”
• noting malice element of tort may be inferred from a lack of probable cause

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).