86 So. 3d 354
Ala.2011Background
- Fielding, a deputy sheriff, shot an unrestrained dog on the Jacksons’ property while on duty.
- Jacksons sued Fielding for multiple torts and sought damages; Fielding moved for summary judgment arguing State immunity.
- Fielding submitted affidavits stating he acted in his official capacity to protect the public, including schoolchildren nearby.
- Jacksons argued immunity did not apply because the incident occurred within Cordova’s police jurisdiction and Fielding acted outside line and scope (and possibly willfully).
- Trial court denied Fielding’s summary-judgment motion; Fielding sought mandamus relief to obtain a summary judgment based on State immunity.
- The Alabama Supreme Court granted the mandamus petition, directing entry of summary judgment in Fielding’s favor based on State immunity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Fielding is entitled to State immunity as a deputy sheriff | Fielding acted within line and scope to preserve peace. | Fielding’s deputy actions are immune when in employment scope. | Fielding is entitled to State immunity. |
| Whether evidence created a genuine issue about line and scope of employment | Fielding was on duty and acting with public protection goals. | Surrounding jurisdictional facts negate line and scope. | No genuine issue; immunity remains. |
| Whether Cranman State-agent immunity analysis defeats State immunity here | Willful/malicious conduct defeats immunity under Cranman. | Cranman analysis is inapplicable to State immunity for deputies. | Cranman does not apply; immunity remains. |
| Whether the Jacksons’ evidence creates a trial issue about willfulness or excess of authority | Evidence shows proper restraint; actions within duty. | Evidence suggests willfulness/malice and overreach. | No trial issue; immunity upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ex parte Purvis, 689 So. 2d 794 (Ala. 1996) (mandamus review of immunity-denial orders)
- Ex parte Turner, 840 So. 2d 132 (Ala. 2002) (immunity mandamus framework)
- Ex parte Rizk, 791 So. 2d 911 (Ala. 2000) (immunity standards; exception to reviewability)
- Ex parte Nall, 879 So. 2d 541 (Ala. 2003) (mandamus test elements for immunity rulings)
- Ex parte BOC Group, Inc., 823 So. 2d 1270 (Ala. 2001) (immunity and mandamus standards)
- Ex parte Yancey, 8 So. 3d 299 (Ala. 2008) (additional guidance on mandamus and immunity)
- Ex parte Alfa Mut. Gen. Ins. Co., 742 So. 2d 182 (Ala. 1999) (summary judgment standard and burden-shifting)
- Swan v. City of Hueytown, 920 So. 2d 1075 (Ala. 2005) (summary judgment evidentiary standard)