Although Roberts argued that Allenwood was operating a public building when he shut the cell door, see id. Following a bench trial on the claim of negligent maintenance of the door, the court granted judgment for the State. Roberts appeals from the grant of the summary judgment. A summary judgment is appropriate when a defendant is immune from tort liability, and we review a summary judgment de novo for errors of law. The absolute immunity provided by paragraph C shall be applicable whenever a discretionary act is reasonably encompassed by the duties of the governmental employee in question, regardless of whether the exercise of discretion is specifically authorized by statute, charter, ordinance, order, resolution, rule or resolve and shall be available to all governmental employees, including police officers and governmental employees involved in child welfare cases, who are required to exercise judgment or discretion in performing their official duties.
Governmental entities are likewise immune from liability for discretionary functions.
We have utilized a four-factor test to determine whether discretionary function immunity applies. In that case the court concluded that a jail guard was carrying out a discretionary function when he slapped a restrained prisoner on the buttocks. See id. at 331. In applying the four factors to the present case, there can be no dispute that corrections is a basic governmental program and that the supervision of inmates is essential to a corrections program. The supervision necessarily involves the exercise of judgment by corrections officers, including the discretionary decision of when to order an inmate to his cell.