holding that, at the motion to dismiss stage, the defendant was not entitled to state-agent immunity on the plaintiffs’ claims, including one for outrage, because “the plaintiffs’ state-law claims The absence of these policies—which undoubtedly will be the subject of discovery—from the record provides additional support for the finding that Maye is not entitled to state-agent immunity at the motion to dismiss stage. against [the defendant] expressly allege[d] that his conduct was either malicious, willful,” or intentional
How later courts described this case
- holding that, at the motion to dismiss stage, the defendant was not entitled to state-agent immunity on the plaintiffs’ claims, including one for outrage, because “the plaintiffs’ state-law claims The absence of these policies—which undoubtedly will be the subject of discovery—from the record provides additional support for the finding that Maye is not entitled to state-agent immunity at the motion to dismiss stage. against [the defendant] expressly allege[d] that his conduct was either malicious, willful,” or intentional
- 'Inasmuch as the issue before us is whether the trial court correctly denied a Rule 12(b)(6), Ala. R. Civ. P., motion to dismiss, "[t]his Court must accept the allegations of the complaint as true." ' (quoting Creola Land Dev., Inc. v. Bentbrooke Hous., L.L.C., 828 So. 2d 285, 288 (Ala. 2002))
- 'Inasmuch as the issue before us is whether the trial court correctly denied a Rule 12(b)(6
- “State law sovereign immunity is relevant [in the Eleventh Amendment context] only as it indicates whether the state considers the entity to be part of the state. It is at best only a rough, overly 13 Case: 13-14182 Date Filed: 11/04/2014 Page: 14 of 18 inclusive gauge of the arm-of-the-state status under the Eleventh Amendment[.]”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
I concur in the result as to the part of the opinion entitled "Eleventh Amendment Immunity." I concur fully in the remainder of the opinion.
LYONS and WOODALL, JJ., concur.