Opinion ID: 1715981
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: WHETHER THE DECISION IN PRESLEY v. MISSISSIPPI STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION SHOULD HAVE PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION ONLY.

Text: This first issue of whether Presley v. Mississippi State Highway Commission, 608 So.2d 1288 (Miss. 1992), wherein this Court found the legislature's response to Pruett v. City of Rosedale, 421 So.2d 1046 (Miss. 1982), in Miss. Code Ann. § 11-46-1 et seq. unconstitutional, should be applied prospectively or retroactively has been answered in the recent case of Robinson v. Stewart, 655 So.2d 866 (Miss. 1995). In Robinson this Court stated emphatically that Presley is not to be applied retroactively. Id. at 868. Since Presley is not to be applied retroactively, the defense of sovereign immunity was available to MTC on November 20, 1986, the date of Rector's accident. There is nothing in the record to suggest that MTC waived this immunity. Rector tries to argue that if Presley is prospective then MTC is still not immune from suit because it does not have immunity for proprietary acts. This argument fails since the distinction between governmental and proprietary functions are applied only to municipalities and not to the state itself. See Strait v. Pat Harrison Waterway Dist., 523 So.2d 36, 40 (Miss. 1988).