William T. Brantley v. City of Horn Lake, Mississippi
152 So. 3d 1106
| Miss. | 2014Background
- Brantley sued the City of Horn Lake for injuries after an ambulance EMT/driver dropped him from a stretcher at the hospital.
- The EMT Lowery was both a Horn Lake firefighter and an EMT; he drove the ambulance.
- City moved for summary judgment claiming MTCA immunity under §11-46-9(l)(c) (fire-protection exemption).
- Circuit court initially denied summary judgment, then granted renewed summary judgment for the City.
- Court of Appeals reverses and remands, holding: (i) fire-protection exemption does not apply; (ii) discretionary-function immunity may apply on remand due to ministerial duties regulated by the State Board of Health.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ambulance transport-related injury falls within fire-protection immunity | Brantley: activity not related to fire protection; exemption inapplicable | City: activity falls within fire-protection duties | Fire-protection exemption inapplicable; immunity does not apply |
| Whether discretionary-function immunity applies to the ambulance operation | Brantley seeks immunity analysis under MTCA’s discretionary-function provision | City: immunity applies to discretionary functions | Discretionary-function immunity may apply; analysis on remand depends on statutory/regulatory context |
| Whether ministerial duties regulated by Board of Health remove discretionary immunity | If ministerial duties exist, immunity may be defeated | Board regulations render some ambulance duties ministerial | Remand to determine if statute/regulation renders the duty to unload a patient ministerial; otherwise immunity may apply |
| Whether MTCA provides complete bar or allows recovery if ministerial duties exist | MTCA not complete bar if ministerial duty identified | MTCA immunity could bar claim | Remand for further proceedings to address ministerial-duty exception on the specific act |
Key Cases Cited
- Herndon v. Mississippi Forestry Comm’n, 67 So.3d 788 (Miss.Ct.App.2010) (scope of fire-protection immunity extends to duties bearing relation to fire protection)
- Land v. Attala County Bd. of Supervisors, 116 So.3d 1085 (Miss.Ct.App.2012) (firefighters’ acts related to fire protection can fall within MTCA immunity)
- Willard v. Mayor & Aldermen of City of Vicksburg, 571 So.2d 972 (Miss.1990) (EMS standard of care under Good Samaritan law remained; MTCA does not alter EMS duty)
- Miss. Transp. Comm’n v. Montgomery, 80 So.3d 789 (Miss.2012) (public-policy function test; discretionary function analysis background)
- Pratt v. Gulfport-Biloxi Reg’l Airport Auth., 97 So.3d 68 (Miss.2012) (discretionary-function immunity can apply to broad functions with ministerial duties within them)
- City of Jackson v. Doe ex rel. J.J., 68 So.3d 1285 (Miss.2011) (operation of a public park as a discretionary function)
- Little v. Miss. Dep’t of Transp., 129 So.3d 132 (Miss.2013) (immunity tied to function; narrow duties may be ministerial if statute/regulation render them so)
- Jones v. Miss. Dep’t of Transp., 744 So.2d 256 (Miss.1999) (adopted public-function test; MTCA requires analyzing function and discretion)
- Fang v. United States, 140 F.3d 1238 (9th Cir.1998) (policy-based decisions vs. ordinary medical care at scene; EMT actions not shielded if no policy/pholder directives)