Opinion ID: 1831360
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Discretionary Immunity, LSA-R.S. 9:2798.1

Text: The City also contends that it is entitled to the statutory immunity granted by LSA-R.S. 9:2798.1. That statute grants governmental units qualified immunity from liability based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform their policy-making or discretionary acts. LSA-R.S. 9:2798.1(B). We do not address the issue of whether the City's failure to warn under these circumstances was a discretionary act for the reason that the discretionary immunity statute is not to be given retroactive application to this 1983 accident. That statute was enacted in 1985 by Act No. 453 of the Legislature. The Act does not clarify procedure or provide a new remedy for enforcement of an obligation. Graham v. Sequoya Corp., 478 So.2d at 1226. For the reasons set forth in the section of this opinion addressing the retroactivity of the $500,000 limit on general damages, we hold that LSA-R.S. 9:2798.1 is a substantive law to be given prospective application only. LSA-R.S. 9:2798.1 likewise affords no immunity to the City in this case.