Court Opinion

ID: 9625550
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 07:44:17.926222+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:25:50.192202
License: Public Domain

GUTHRIE, Chief Justice
(concurring and dissenting in part).
I concur in the result hereof based upon the failure of plaintiffs to prove that any actions of the city were the proximate cause of the injury and agree that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur does not aid plaintiffs. I withhold my agreement, without expression of my views, from that portion of the opinion which discusses sovereign immunity for the reason that I deem it improper and unnecessary of decision to reach this question because of the disposal made upon these first two grounds. As a further ground for this, it is my view that such a far-reaching pronouncement should come from the entire court rather than a panel of the justices. Nor am I satisfied that the immunity doctrine as applied to governmental subdivisions, such as counties, school districts, and municipalities, has the same origin and roots as, or is identical to, that of the sovereign immunity of the State, and would express no view thereon at this time.