Hammonds v. Reliance Insurance Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that imminent harm exception applied to schoolchild who was tripped while walking down unsupervised stairs because the danger was limited in terms of duration and geographical area and risk of harm was significant and foreseeable
• finding that duty to supervise students is performed for benefit of municipality and therefore, doctrine of sovereign immunity did not apply
• describing “governmental immunity” as an “exception[] to the general rule” that municipal employees were “personally liable for their own tortious conduct”
• finding imminent harm existed because the danger was foreseeable in a case involving a schoolchild who was injured en route to recess in an unsupervised area
• exercising plenary review over availability of qualified immunity because material facts were undisputed
• court resolved issue of qualified immunity where question of law presented and material facts undisputed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).