Little v. Mississippi Department of Transportation
129 So. 3d 132
| Miss. | 2013Background
- Three motorists sued the Mississippi Department of Transportation after colliding with a pine tree fallen across Highway 26.
- MDOT moved to dismiss claiming discretionary-function immunity under MTCA; circuit court granted, then Court of Appeals affirmed.
- Little alleged MDOT failed to maintain, repair, inspect, remove dangerous trees, and properly patrol the right-of-way.
- Montgomery and related cases discussed whether road maintenance is discretionary or ministerial under MTCA.
- The Court held that maintenance of highway right-of-way is ministerial and not protected by discretionary-function immunity; case remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Distinction between right-of-way and road maintenance | Little argues there is a separate right-of-way maintenance duty. | MDOT contends both fall under road maintenance and are discretionary. | No merit; right-of-way maintenance falls within the ministerial duty. |
| Discretionary-function immunity for right-of-way maintenance | Right-of-way maintenance is discretionary; immunity applies. | Right-of-way maintenance is discretionary under MTCA. | Right-of-way maintenance is ministerial; no MTCA discretionary-function immunity. |
| Application of MTCA immunity provisions | Any immunity must be evaluated under 11-46-9(1) disjunctively for each claim. | Immunity can attach under any applicable subsection; one suffices for immunity. | Immunity can attach under any applicable subsection; Court upheld standard approach and remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mississippi Transportation Commission v. Montgomery, 80 So.3d 789 (Miss. 2012) (holds discretionary status depends on statute carve-outs; traffic devices example)
- Brazeale v. Lewis, 498 So.2d 321 (Miss. 1986) (discretion in road maintenance depends on policy factors)
- Coplin v. Francis, 631 So.2d 752 (Miss. 1994) (road maintenance discretionary; policy considerations guide judgments)
- Mohundro v. Alcorn County, 675 So.2d 848 (Miss. 1996) (discretion in maintenance decisions acknowledged)
- McFarland v. Miss. Dep’t of Transp., 81 So.3d 1209 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (state maintenance cases continued to influence MTCA immunity rulings)