State ex rel. City of Grandview, Missouri, Relator v. The Honorable Jack R. Grate
490 S.W.3d 368
Mo.2016Background
- Plaintiffs sued four Grandview police officers and the City alleging wrongful arrest, battery, malicious prosecution, and negligence; City was joined for vicarious liability.
- Plaintiffs asserted the City’s purchased law‑enforcement liability insurance waived sovereign immunity under §§ 71.185 and 537.610.
- The City moved for summary judgment asserting sovereign immunity because the insurance policy expressly preserved sovereign/governmental immunity and only covered claims where immunity was statutorily inapplicable.
- The circuit court overruled the City’s motion; the court of appeals denied prohibition; City sought relief from the Missouri Supreme Court.
- The Supreme Court issued a writ of prohibition, holding the City did not waive sovereign immunity by purchasing an insurance policy that disclaimed coverage for claims barred by sovereign immunity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the City waived sovereign immunity by purchasing liability insurance | Insurance purchase constituted waiver under §§ 71.185 / 537.610 and allowed suit up to policy limits | Policy language expressly preserved sovereign and governmental immunity; coverage only applies where immunity is inapplicable | City did not waive sovereign immunity; policy disclaimer controls |
| Whether policy insured employees (officers) exposing City to suit | Policy defines officers as insureds; therefore waiver applies to claims against officers and city vicariously | Endorsement conditions payment on inapplicability of sovereign immunity, limiting coverage to statutorily waived claims | Policy covers officers only to extent sovereign immunity is statutorily waived; disclaimer prevents waiver beyond statutory exceptions |
| Whether operation of police department is a governmental function (impacting immunity) | Plaintiffs: not disputed that police operation is governmental; waiver argument focuses on insurance effect | City: operation is a governmental function and thus generally immune absent statutory waiver | Court: police operation is a governmental function; sovereign immunity applies unless statutorily waived |
| Whether prior precedent permits enforcement of policy disclaimer preserving immunity | Plaintiffs: insurance purchase should enable suit under statutory scheme despite disclaimer | City: State ex rel. Bd. of Trs. shows identical disclaimers preserve immunity and support prohibition | Court follows precedent: disclaimer upheld; prohibition appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Bd. of Trs. of City of N. Kansas City Mem'l Hosp. v. Russell, 843 S.W.2d 353 (Mo. banc 1992) (insurance policy disclaimers preserving sovereign immunity upheld)
- Metro. St. Louis Sewer Dist. v. City of Bellefontaine Neighbors, 476 S.W.3d 913 (Mo. banc 2016) (definition and scope of sovereign immunity discussed)
- Southers v. City of Farmington, 263 S.W.3d 603 (Mo. banc 2008) (distinguishing governmental vs. proprietary functions)
- Fantasma v. Kansas City, Mo., Bd. of Police Comm'rs, 913 S.W.2d 388 (Mo. App. 1996) (sovereign immunity attaches to operation of a police force)