Opinion ID: 1360358
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Immunity of Officers of Authority.

Text: The appellees, Gebhart and Gagnon, were officers of the Alaska Housing Authority. Gebhart was its general administrative head, and Gagnon was manager of the urban renewal project in charge of acquisition of property, and the person who ordered that appellant's buildings be demolished. Appellant sought to impose personal liability upon these officers for the damages to which she was entitled, but the trial court held they were immune from suit. The Alaska Housing Authority is a public corporate authority created for the purpose of undertaking slum clearance and providing low cost housing projects. [16] Because it exists and functions only for the purpose of serving a public need, its officers, Gebhart and Gagnon, fall within the classification of public officers. In this capacity, and within the scope of their official duties, they exercised their discretionary power in causing appellant's land to be taken and her buildings to be destroyed. They are immune from civil liability for this action under the well recognized rule that affords such protection to a public officer, acting within the scope of his official duties, for damages caused by a mistake by him in the exercise of judgment or discretion, or because of an erroneous interpretation and application of the law. [17] The trial court committed no error in holding these appellees immune from suit. The case is remanded with directions to the trial court to modify the judgment as follows: 1. Change the amount appellant is entitled to recover for the value of her destroyed buildings from $13,400 to $22,950, and recompute interest accordingly. 2. Realistically assess and add to the judgment in appellant's favor an amount representing fair attorney's fees for each of the proceedings in the previous litigation mentioned in this opinion, making allowance for the one fee of $600 awarded by this court in the case of Bridges v. Alaska Housing Authority, File No. 16, 349 P.2d 149 (Alaska 1959). As so modified, the judgment is affirmed.