Court Opinion

ID: 9932145
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 18:32:19.707231+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:04.571240
License: Public Domain

If it were not for the majority opinion in Taylor v.Shoemaker, 605 So.2d 828 (Ala. 1992), I would dissent, because I believe that this case is DeStafney v. University of Alabama,413 So.2d 391 (Ala. 1982). However, between DeStafney and this case stands Taylor v. Shoemaker, in which the concept of "discretionary function" immunity was extended to factual situations in which there was no discernible discretion involved. I dissented in Taylor, asking "Where is the discretion?" 605 So.2d at 835. I still do not know, but I am bound by stare decisis. I do know that if there was a "discretionary function" in Taylor, then there was a "discretionary function" in this case.