Court Opinion

ID: 9569363
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:13:09.411343+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:51:08.693000
License: Public Domain

HUNTLEY, Justice,
concurring specially.
I concur in the majority opinion, having some reservations about the way the bench and bar might interpret the following impure, adulterated dicta near the end of the opinion:
If, for example, the evidence on remand indicates the county, due to budgetary constraints or other legitimate factors made a policy decision as to how it would staff the jail facilities, then such a decision would be discretionary and would immunize the county from liability.
I can foresee enterprising counsel urging upon trial courts that the foregoing sentence means that a governmental agency can immunize itself against the consequences of negligent conduct by formally issuing a policy decision to fund and perform certain operations in a negligent manner.
This majority opinion does not stand for the proposition that a governmental agency can adopt a policy to perform operational functions in a negligent and careless manner, because by definition and in accord with the overall policy of the Idaho Tort Claims Act, the discretionary function exception of I.C. § 6-904 does not license a governmental entity to develop a policy to be “intentionally negligent” — such would be in total conflict with the purpose and *1002intent of the Idaho Tort Claims Act. That purpose was to provide governmental responsibility for negligent conduct of its employees in performance of governmental functions, just as had previously been the casé in the performance of proprietary functions.
If I were authoring the opinion and felt the urge to espouse dicta, I would rephrase the subject sentence and the one which follows it thusly:
If, for example, the evidence on remand indicates the county, due to budgetary constraints or other factors made a policy decision that it would not provide certain services to the public, then such a decision would be discretionary and would immunize the county from liability. If, on the other hand, the county undertakes to provide a service, it is required to use ordinary and reasonable care in the performance of that service.