@Arella Mae,
No reason to thank me for increasing your very limited knowledge of the legal system we all live under AM.
Oh I was not kidding you and neither was the Alabama high court or a thousand years of legal history.
http://www.uah.edu/legal/pdf_files/Alabama%20High%20Court%20Reaffirms%20Sovereign%20Immunity%20and%20Choice%20of%20Law%20Protections.pdf
Alabama High Court Reaffirms Sovereign Immunity and Choice of Law Protections.
Up until 2000, Ellis Johnson was employed as an assistant football coach at the
University of Alabama (UA). Mr. Johnson’s contract was terminated at the same time that the
contract of the head football coach, Mike Dubose, was terminated. Mr. Johnson’s employment
contract had a liquidated damages clause requiring UA to pay him the amount of his base salary
for the remainder of the contract’s term if his contract was terminated without cause. After
leaving UA, Johnson accepted a lower paying position as head football coach at The Citadel.
Johnson made a claim against UA for liquidated damages. After negotiations with UA failed,
Johnson sued the University of Alabama, its president, and its athletic director for breach of
employment contract, fraud, and other claims. Johnson v. Sorensen, 914 So.2d 830 (Ala. 2005).
UA defended by claiming that Johnson’s suit was barred by sovereign immunity and that
he was not owed any liquidated damages. The University pointed out that the employment
contract contained a provision stating the institution was not waiving its right to claim any
“exemptions, privileges and immunities as may be provided by law.” The contract was signed by
Sorensen, who was then the UA President. The trial court entered a summary judgment for all
the defendants, and Johnson appealed.
With regard to UA’s sovereign immunity defense, the Alabama Supreme Court simply
reiterated established law:
Under Article 1, § 14, Alabama Constitution of 1901, the State and its agencies
have absolute immunity from suit in any court. … This immunity extends to the
state’s institutions of higher learning. … State officers and employees, in their
official capacities and individually, are also absolutely immune from suit when
the action is, in effect, one against the state. … Those dealing with the State are
charged with knowledge of its immunity.
Johnson, 914 So.2d at 835 (emphasis added).
The defense of “state agent immunity” of state officials sued individually was similarly
addressed by the Court, which quoted from an important 2000 case, Ex parte Cranman, 792
So.2d 392 (Ala. 2000), as follows:A State agent shall be immune from civil liability in his or her personal capacity
when the conduct made the basis of the claim against the agent is based upon the
agent’s
. . . .
2) exercising his or her judgment in the administration of a
department or agency of government, including, but not limited to,
examples such as:
a) making administrative adjudications;
b) allocating resources;
c) negotiating contracts;
d) hiring, firing, transferring, assigning, or supervising
personnel; or
. . . .
5) exercising judgment in the discharge of duties imposed by statute,
rule, or regulation in releasing prisoners, counseling or releasing
persons of unsound mind, or educating students.
Johnson, 914 So.2d at 836.
Applying these legal principles, the Court held that Johnson’s claim for liquidated
damages arising from breach of his employment contract was barred by the University’s
sovereign immunity and the UA administrators’ “state agent immunity.”
As a
