Harris v. McCray, et al.
| Docket Number: | 2001-CA-01627-SCT Linked Case(s): 2001-CA-01627-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-23-2003 Opinion Author: Easley, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Tort Claims Act - Discretionary duty Judge(s) Concurring: Pittman, C.J., Smith, P.J., Waller, Cobb and Carlson, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Dissenting Author : McRae, P.J. Concurs in Result Only: Graves, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 04-09-2001 Appealed from: Jefferson County Circuit Court Judge: Lamar Pickard Disposition: Entered judgment for the Appellee after finding it was immune pursuant to the MTCA. Case Number: 96-0022 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Victor Lorell Harris, a Minor by and through his Mother and Next Friend, Betty Jean Harris, and Acting Individually |
ANITA M. STAMPS |
||
| Appellee: | Willie McCray and the Jefferson County School District | JOHN SIMEON HOOKS JAMES A. KEITH |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Personal injury - Tort Claims Act - Discretionary duty |
| Summary of the Facts: | Victor Harris, by and through his mother and next friend, Betty Harris, filed suit against Willie McCray and the Jefferson County School District for damages resulting from a heatstroke Harris suffered while at football practice. The court determined that Harris had suffered damages in the amount of $350,000, but that the School District was immune from liability under the Mississippi Torts Claims Act. Harris appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | ANALYSIS: A governmental entity and its employee enjoy immunity if there is exercise of ordinary care in the performance of a duty under a statute, ordinance or regulation and enjoy immunity based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function or duty whether or not the discretion be abused. When an official is required to use his own judgment or discretion in performing a duty, that duty is discretionary. The actions of high school coaches are discretionary in nature. Therefore, the court properly determined that the acts or omissions of McCray, performed in his capacity as head coach within the course and scope of his employment, were discretionary in nature. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
