 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Howard v. City of Atmore12/12/2003
against Chief McKinley. However, the statute does not shield the City from liability for the alleged "neglect, carelessness and unskillfulness" of Officer Bryars, based on evidence indicating that he failed to comply with paragraph 7 of the order. Insofar as the summary judgment for the City was entered with respect to those claims, the trial court erred.
II. Summary
In summary, the judgment in favor of Chief McKinley is affirmed. The judgment in favor of Officer Bryars is reversed, to the extent of the claims alleging wrongful monitoring of Bowens under paragraph 7 of the order, and the case is remanded for further proceedings. To the extent that judgment disposed of claims based on portions of the order or manual contemplating the exercise of judgment, as discussed above, the judgment is affirmed. To the extent the judgment in favor of the City is based on vicarious liability for the acts of Chief McKinley, the judgment is affirmed. To the extent that judgment is based on vicarious liability for the acts of Officer Bryars for which Bryars is not immune, the judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED.
Houston, See, Lyons, Brown, Harwood, and Stuart, JJ., concur.
Johnstone, J., concurs specially.
JOHNSTONE, Justice (concurring specially).
I concur fully in the main opinion. I write specially only to add a couple of supportive observations.
The main opinion correctly holds "that a State agent acts beyond authority and is therefore not immune when he or she fails to discharge duties pursuant to detailed rules or regulations, such as those stated on a checklist." ___ So. 2d at ___ (internal quotation marks omitted, emphasis in main opinion). The second exception to immunity as stated by Cranman excepts conduct "beyond [the State agent's] authority." 792 So. 2d at 405. A State agent's violating applicable rules or regulations is, of course, "beyond his or her authority," id.
In further support of part "B. [Immunity of] Chief McKinley" in the main opinion, I add that immune category (1) of the Cranman restatement, immunizing a State agent's "formulating plans, policies, or designs," 792 So. 2d at 405, immunizes Chief McKinley's failure to adapt the policies of his department as the plaintiff contends he should have adapted them.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Alabama Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|