Court Opinion

ID: 8203086
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 23:44:18.066734+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:41:00.825771
License: Public Domain

WILLIAM A. BABLITCH, J.
¶ 61. (concurring). Although my sentiments are with the dissent, I concur only because I feel compelled by stare decisis to do so.
¶ 62. Although the majority's result is consistent with past cases, it is also an unjust result. This court should revisit these past cases for the reasons so well stated in the dissent of Justice Prosser. A doctrine of governmental immunity that has caused such injustice and inequity, in this case and others, cannot, and I predict, will not, stand much longer. See, e.g., Kierstyn v. Racine Unified Sch. Dist., 228 Wis. 2d 81, 596 N.W.2d 417 (1999); Willow Creek Ranch v. Town of Shelby, 2000 WI 56, 235 Wis. 2d 409, 611 N.W.2d 693. Unfortunately, because this court will not now revisit the past, Scott suffers.
¶ 63. Here, Scott did nothing wrong. In fact, he did everything right. Scott sought out the appropriate individual to assist him in choosing courses to fulfill the requirements for his NCAA scholarship. Scott relied on the advice of his high school guidance counselor, the school official who was privy to the information Scott *160requested; regrettably, it was to his detriment. The law should not allow such an injustice. Although the majority denies Scott any relief, I believe he should have a legal remedy. Accordingly, I respectfully concur.
¶ 64. I am authorized to state that Justice N. PATRICK CROOKS joins this concurrence.