Opinion ID: 1706781
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 15

Heading: sovereign immunity law applicable on august 15, 1989.

Text: ¶ 31. A review of the applicable sovereign immunity law on August 15, 1989, the time of the accident, is in order. ¶ 32. In 1982, this Court abolished judicially created sovereign immunity in Pruett v. City of Rosedale, 421 So.2d 1046 (Miss.1982), holding that it was the Legislature's duty to determine the extent of sovereign immunity. The Legislature responded by enacting Miss.Code Ann. § 11-46-1 et seq., a comprehensive torts claim act providing a limited waiver of sovereign immunity. Hord v. City of Yazoo City, 702 So.2d 121, 123 (Miss.1997). However, Miss.Code Ann. § 11-46-6 stated that the Act was not yet effective and that the common law that existed before Pruett would govern until the act became effective. In 1992, in Presley v. Mississippi State Highway Comm'n, 608 So.2d 1288 (Miss.1992), we held that Miss.Code Ann. § 11-46-6 was unconstitutional because it sought to revive law by reference. Subsequently, we held that Presley was to be applied prospectively only. Robinson v. Stewart, 655 So.2d 866, 868 (Miss.1995). ¶ 33. This case is a post- Pruett, pre- Presley cause of action, because it arose on August 15, 1989. Therefore, according to Robinson, we follow Miss.Code Ann. § 11-46-6 which directs us to apply pre- Pruett common law. ¶ 34. Pre- Pruett common law mandates a finding of whether the act involved is a discretionary function or a ministerial function in determining the liability of county officials individually. Coplin v. Francis, 631 So.2d 752, 753 (Miss. 1994). An official is immune when the act being performed is discretionary. Coplin, 631 So.2d at 753. We have held that maintenance and repair of roads are discretionary functions. Id. at 754. Thus, in the present case the individual members of the Board of Supervisors for Jefferson Davis County are immune from suit. ¶ 35. Next we must consider whether Jefferson Davis County is immune from suit. It is well settled that a county has no liability except as authorized by statute. Coplin v. Francis, 631 So.2d 752, 754 (Miss.1994)( citing Leflore County v. Big Sand Drainage Dist., 383 So.2d 501 (Miss.1980)). As stated previously, pre- Pruett common law controls this case and dictates that counties are merely political subdivisions of the state and as such are not liable for maintenance of bridges and roads. Leflore County v. Big Sand Drainage Dist., 383 So.2d at 502-03 ( citing Brabham v. Board of Supervisors of Hinds County, 54 Miss. 363 (1877)). ¶ 36. In Mohundro v. Alcorn County, 675 So.2d 848 (Miss.1996), Mohundro asked this Court to create an exception to sovereign immunity when the governmental entity causes the hazard. Mohundro, 675 So.2d at 852-53. We stated in Mohundro that if a county official ... acted with such gross neglect or callous indifference to the safety of Mohundro and the public as a whole such that his conduct may be fairly described as constructively intentional, he is not entitled to immunity. Mohundro at 854 (emphasis added). The present facts do not give rise to liability under the Mohundro exception.