Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 11-93-2 (2026)
Maximum Amount of Damages Recoverable Against Governmental Entities; Settlement or Compromise of Claims Not to Exceed Maximum Amounts.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
The recovery of damages under any judgment against a governmental entity shall be limited to $100,000.00 for bodily injury or death for one person in any single occurrence. Recovery of damages under any judgment or judgments against a governmental entity shall be limited to $300,000.00 in the aggregate where more than two persons have claims or judgments on account of bodily injury or death arising out of any single occurrence. Recovery of damages under any judgment against a governmental entity shall be limited to $100,000.00 for damage or loss of property arising out of any single occurrence. No governmental entity shall settle or compromise any claim for bodily injury, death or property damage in excess of the amounts hereinabove set forth.
(Acts 1977, No. 673, p. 1161, §2.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 56
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1984–2025 · leading case: City of Prattville v. Corley, 892 So. 2d 845 (Ala. 2003).
City of Prattville v. Corley, 892 So. 2d 845 (Ala. 2003). “The City of Prattville ("the City") appeals from the trial court's order declaring that § 11-93-2, Ala.Code 1975, controls the damages awards for tort claims brought by residents and business owners (collectively "residents") against the City arising from flooding that occurred…”
St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Nowlin, 542 So. 2d 1190 (Ala. 1989). “Paul denied any indebtedness, asserting that the Board was entitled to the protection of Ala.Code 1975, § 11-93-2, [1] and that the Board had fulfilled its obligations to Nowlin.”
Health Care Auth. for Baptist Health v. Davis, 158 So. 3d 397 (Ala. 2013). “Davis points out that among “the provisions” of Chapter 93 “hereby made applicable” are the provisions in Ala.Code 1975, § 11-93-2 and § 11-93-1(1), defining the partial immunity granted by Chapter 93 as a partial immunity for counties and municipalities and their agencies.”
Suttles v. Roy, 75 So. 3d 90 (Ala. 2010). “Under Ala. Code 1975, § 11-93-2 and §§ ll-47-24(a) and -190, they contended, the maximum amount of damages Roy could recover in her action against them was $100,000.”
Home Indem. Co. v. Anders, 459 So. 2d 836 (Ala. 1984). “Several defendants in the suit counterclaimed, contending § 11-93-2 was not applicable, or that if it was applicable it was unconstitutional, and that it did not contain an aggregate limitation on the recovery of property damage.”
Garner v. Covington Cnty., 624 So. 2d 1346 (Ala. 1993). “The trial court reduced the $750,000 verdict to $100,000 pursuant to Ala.Code 1975, § 11-93-2, and entered judgments for the plaintiffs.”
Smitherman v. Marshall Cnty. Com'n, 746 So. 2d 1001 (Ala. 1999). “The plaintiffs moved for a partial summary judgment, seeking, in part, a ruling from the trial court that the statutory governmental-entity damages cap of § 11-93-2, Ala.Code 1975, did not apply to the Marshall County defendants in their individual capacities.”
City of Birmingham v. Horn, 810 So. 2d 667 (Ala. 2001). “tion of the general issue in this case, as we stated it above, requires us to answer three questions: (1) Was the trial court correct in using the lodestar method for its calculation of attorney fees? (2) Did the trial court correctly determine that the plaintiffs were entitled…”
MacOn v. Huntsville Utils., 613 So. 2d 318 (Ala. 1992). “The question presented is whether the statutory cap of $100,000 applicable to suits against a municipality (Ala.Code 1975, § 11-93-2), applies to a suit by a municipal employee who had sued his employer on the ground that he had been wrongfully terminated because he had filed a…”
Wright v. Cleburne Cnty. Hosp. Bd., Inc., 255 So. 3d 186 (Ala. 2017). “In that order, the trial court ruled that the $100,000 cap on damages set out *189 in § 11-93-2, Ala. Code 1975, applied to Wright's claims against three nurses-Dawn Reid, Phyllis Harris, and Tuwanda Worrills (hereinafter referred to collectively as "the nurses")-who were…”
Moore v. Mobile Infirmary Ass'n, 592 So. 2d 156 (Ala. 1991). “Code 1975, § 9-6-14 (immunizing pollution control authorities from tort liability), § 11-93-2 (limiting tort liability of governmental entities to $100,000), § 25-5-11(a) (immunizing coemployees from liability for negligence and wantonness), § 32-1-2 (immunizing motor vehicle…”
Smith v. Schulte, 671 So. 2d 1334 (Ala. 1995). “In that case, the Court held that Ala.Code 1975, § 11-93-2, which limited to $100,000 jury awards of damages against "governmental entitit[ies]," did not violate § 11.”
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.