Cockrell v. Pearl River Valley Water Supply Dist.
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-02090-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-05-2004 Opinion Author: Carlson, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Tort Claims Act - Constitutionality of section 11-46-13 - Scope and course of employment - Section 11-46-5(1) Judge(s) Concurring: Pittman, C.J., Smith and Waller, P.JJ., Cobb and Dickinson, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Dissenting Author : Easley, J. Concurs in Result Only: Graves, J. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-19-2002 Appealed from: Rankin County Circuit Court Judge: William E. Chapman, III Disposition: The Pearl River Valley Water Supply District ("District") was granted summary judgment pursuant to the Mississippi Tort Claims Act (MTCA) dismissing with prejudice all claims asserted against it by Sandra Cockrell. Case Number: 2000-192 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Sandra Cockrell |
WILLIAM P. FEATHERSTON, JR. |
||
| Appellee: | Pearl River Valley Water Supply District | J. STEPHEN WRIGHT |
|
|
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 - Constitutionality of section 11-46-13 - Scope and course of employment - Section 11-46-5(1) |
| Summary of the Facts: | Sandra Cockrell filed an action against the Pearl River Valley Water Supply District alleging that Officer Joey James, acting within the course and scope of his employment with the District, acted with reckless disregard for her emotional well-being and safety. The District filed a motion for summary judgment which the court granted. Cockrell appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Constitutionality of section 11-46-13 Cockrell argues that section 11-46-13, which states that all Tort Claims Act claims are to be determined without a jury, is unconstitutional. Cockrell's failure to raise the issue before the trial court and to notify the Attorney General results in a procedural bar on this issue. Issue 2: Scope and course of employment Cockrell argues that there is a genuine issue of material of fact regarding whether Officer James was acting in the course and scope of his employment with the District, because his action of hugging Cockrell was similar to an officer consoling a victim of a crime. Under section 11-46-5(1), a governmental entity can be liable for the misconduct of its employee if that misconduct occurred while the employee was acting within the course and scope of employment. However, a governmental entity is not liable for any misconduct of its employees which occur outside the course and scope of that employee's employment such as conduct which constitutes fraud, malice, libel, slander, defamation or any criminal offense other than traffic violations. Sexual misconduct falls outside the course and scope of employment. While Officer James was within the course and scope of his employment when he first stopped Cockrell for suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol, he was no longer acting in the furtherance of his employer's interests when he diverted from his employment for personal reasons. Therefore, the District is not liable. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
