exceptions to sovereign immunity (Alabama) · Go Syfert
← Alabama issues

exceptions to sovereign immunity in Alabama

6 Alabama opinions name it 1 courts 1996–2007 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Latham v. Department of Correctionsgreen
ala · 2005 · cited in 4 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
2 sentences

2007See Latham, 927 So.2d at 821 (laying out the exceptions to sovereign immunity).

2007See Latham, 927 So.2d at 821 (laying out the exceptions to sovereign immunity).

44
Ex Parte Cartergreen
ala · 1981 · cited in 2 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
2 sentences

2007The case the Court relied on in Milton II, Ex parte Carter, 395 So.2d 65, 68 (Ala.1980), restricts the sovereign-immunity exceptions, except for declaratory-judgment actions, to suits against State officials.

2007The case the Court relied on in Milton II, Ex parte Carter, 395 So.2d 65, 68 (Ala.1980), restricts the sovereign-immunity exceptions, except for declaratory-judgment actions, to suits against State officials.

22
Phillips v. Thomasgreen
ala · 1989 · cited in 2 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996
2 sentences

1996Although we recognize that this Court, in Spring Hill Lighting did reaffirm the principle that " 'a state officer or employee is not protected by § 14 when he acts willfully, maliciously, illegally, fraudulently, in bad faith, beyond his authority, or under a mistaken interpretation of the law,' " 662 So.2d at 1148 , quoting Phillips v. Thomas , 555 So.2d 81 , 83 (Ala. 1989), none of the exceptions to sovereign immunity listed in Spring Hill Lighting applies here.

1996Although we recognize that this Court, in Spring Hill Lighting did reaffirm the principle that “ ‘a state officer or employee is not protected by § 14 when he acts willfully, maliciously, illegally, fraudulently, in bad faith, beyond his authority, or under a mistaken interpretation of the law,’ ” 662 So.2d at 1148 , quoting Phillips v. Thomas, 555 So.2d 81, 83 (Ala.1989), none of the exceptions to sovereign immunity listed in Spring Hill Lighting applies here.

22

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
State Hwy. Dept. v. Milton Const. Co. green
ala · 1991
2 sentences

2007In Milton II, notwithstanding the language suggesting that the exceptions to sovereign immunity apply to State agencies, the Court held “that this lawsuit is not barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity, because it is in the nature of an action to compel state officers to perform their legal duties and pay Milton Construction for services contracted for and rendered.” 586 So.2d at 875 .

2007In Milton II, notwithstanding the language suggesting that the exceptions to sovereign immunity apply to State agencies, the Court held "that this lawsuit is not barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity, because it is in the nature of an action to compel state officers to perform their legal duties and pay Milton Construction for services contracted for and rendered." 586 So.2d at 875 .

22007–2007
Spring Hill Lighting & Supply Co. v. Square D Co., Inc. green
ala · 1995
2 sentences

1996Although we recognize that this Court, in Spring Hill Lighting did reaffirm the principle that " 'a state officer or employee is not protected by § 14 when he acts willfully, maliciously, illegally, fraudulently, in bad faith, beyond his authority, or under a mistaken interpretation of the law,' " 662 So.2d at 1148 , quoting Phillips v. Thomas , 555 So.2d 81 , 83 (Ala. 1989), none of the exceptions to sovereign immunity listed in Spring Hill Lighting applies here.

1996Although we recognize that this Court, in Spring Hill Lighting did reaffirm the principle that “ ‘a state officer or employee is not protected by § 14 when he acts willfully, maliciously, illegally, fraudulently, in bad faith, beyond his authority, or under a mistaken interpretation of the law,’ ” 662 So.2d at 1148 , quoting Phillips v. Thomas, 555 So.2d 81, 83 (Ala.1989), none of the exceptions to sovereign immunity listed in Spring Hill Lighting applies here.

21996–1996

Statutes the citing opinions construe

AL § Ala. Code § 6-6-220 (4)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

PA 77 (1984–2026) AL 6 (1996–2007) MO 5 (1990–2016) OH 4 (2009–2018) CT 4 (1996–2024) IL 2 (2013–2013)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check