answering a certified question from this court in the affirmative that “[a] sheriff is an executive officer of the State of Alabama, who is immune from suit under Article I, § 14 ... ”
How later courts described this case
- answering a certified question from this court in the affirmative that “[a] sheriff is an executive officer of the State of Alabama, who is immune from suit under Article I, § 14 ... ”
- finding § 14-6-1 unconstitutional “[t]o the extent it purports to impose civil liability on a sheriff for the acts of a jailer appointed by the sheriff”
- stating that a sheriff is an executive officer of the State of Alabama and is immune from suit
- "This Court has specifically held that a suit against a sheriff is `essentially a suit against the state' and thus `not maintainable.' "
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
I agree that the sheriff is an executive officer of the State. Having made this determination, we have addressed the specific question certified to this Court. While it might seem reasonable to interpret the certified question as raising the issue of whether the sheriff is immune from suit, I believe that the question more properly *Page 447
raises questions about the county's liability. Therefore, I would not address the state immunity issue.