holding that a police investigator detaining plaintiff for questioning was exercising a discretionary function
How later courts described this case
- holding that a police investigator detaining plaintiff for questioning was exercising a discretionary function
- 'Qualified immunity [now referred to as State-agent immunity] is an affirmative defense that the defendant must raise and prove, and upon a defendant's motion for summary judgment the burden is on the defendant to show that his acts are entitled to such immunity. Phillips v. Thomas, 555 So.2d 81 (Ala. 1989).'
- police investigator detaining plaintiff for questioning was exercising a discretionary function and, therefore, immune from liability on false imprisonment claim
- student claiming property improperly seized by Department of Public Safety investigator could sue investigator
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
I do not believe that either Mr. Floyd or Chief Smith was entitled to discretionary immunity as a matter of law on the conversion claim. Taylor v. Shoemaker , 605 So.2d 828 , 834-35
(Ala. 1992) (Houston, J., dissenting).