Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 11-1-2 (2026)
County Declared a Body Corporate.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
Every county is a body corporate, with power to sue or be sued in any court of record.
(Code 1852, §763; Code 1867, §897; Code 1876, §815; Code 1886, §886; Code 1896, §1397; Code 1907, §123; Code 1923, §181; Code 1940, T. 12, §3.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: Cook v. Cnty. of St. Clair, 384 So. 2d 1 (Ala. 1980).
Cook v. Cnty. of St. Clair, 384 So. 2d 1 (Ala. 1980). “See Copeland and Screws, Governmental Responsibility for Tort in Alabama, 13 Ala.”
Wheeler v. George, 39 So. 3d 1061 (Ala. 2009). “1980), in which this Court held: "`Counties are amenable to suit in tort under Code of Alabama, 1975, § 11-1-2. Because counties, as bodies corporate, act through their governing bodies, the county [commissions, the] commissioners likewise are subject to suit in tort, not in…”
Lee v. Hale Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 14 So. 3d 844 (Ala. 2009). “Alabama Code 1975, § 11-1-2, contains nearly the same wording: "Every county is a body corporate, with power to sue or be sued in any court of record.”
Calvert v. Cullman Cnty. Com'n, 669 So. 2d 119 (Ala. 1995). “I note that Ala.Code 1975, § 11-1-2, reads: "Every county is a body corporate, with power to sue or be sued in any court of record.”
Elmore Cnty. Com'n v. Ragona, 540 So. 2d 720 (Ala. 1989). “That holding was based on Ala.Code 1975, § 11-1-2, which provides: "Every county is a body corporate, with power to sue or be sued in any court of record.”
Health Care Auth. for Baptist Health v. Davis, 158 So. 3d 397 (Ala. 2013). “1958) (now § 11-1-2, § 11-12-5, and § 6-5-20, Ala.Code 1975, respectively), which permitted the county “to sue or be sued” and provided for a claim procedure before bringing suit.”
Ex Parte City of Birmingham, 507 So. 2d 471 (Ala. 1987). “" We held in the Huntsville Hospital Board case that this statute establishes jurisdiction over a county in another county and we decided the venue question on the basis of § 6-3-3, which provides that actions for work and labor done may be brought in the county where the work…”
Vinson v. Clarke Cnty., Ala., 10 F. Supp. 2d 1282 (S.D. Ala. 1998). “Alabama Code § 11-1-2 (1975) removes the shield of sovereign immunity for suits against counties and county commissioners in their official capacities.”
Smitherman v. Marshall Cnty. Com'n, 746 So. 2d 1001 (Ala. 1999). “1980), in which this Court held: "Counties are amenable to suit in tort under Code of Alabama, 1975, § 11-1-2. Because counties, as bodies corporate, act through their governing bodies, the county [commissions, the] commissioners likewise are subject to suit in tort, not in…”
Est. of Wilson v. Berry, 68 So. 3d 178 (Ala. Civ. App. 2011). “We reverse the trial court’s judgment based on the second argument raised by the Wilson defendants, and our resolution of that threshold issue again bars our consideration of the merits of the trial court’s judgment.”
Horne v. Russell Cnty. Comm'n, 379 F. Supp. 2d 1305 (M.D. Ala. 2005). “1980), in which this Court held: “Counties are amenable to suit in tort under Code of Alabama, 1975, § 11-1-2. Because counties, as bodies corporate, act through their governing bodies, the county [commissions, the] commissioners likewise are subject to suit in tort, not in…”
Jefferson Cnty. v. Flanagan, 722 So. 2d 763 (Ala. Civ. App. 1998). “" The court also held that "§ 11-1-2 [, Ala.Code 1975,] allows suits against counties, and their governing bodiesthe county commissions and commissionersin their official, but not in their individual capacity in tort irrespective of any corporate-governmental function…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.