Twiner v. Jenkins, 46514
| Citation | 257 So.2d 488 |
| Decision Date | 31 January 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 46514,46514 |
| Parties | Clem Davis TWINER v. Monroe JENKINS et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi |
Pritchard, Neeld & Pierce, Jackson, for appellant.
Anderson, Banks, Nichols & Leventhal, Jackson, for appellees.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Circuit Court of Jefferson County which sustained the demurrer of defendants and dismissed the cause.
The issue before the Court is whether a municipality retains immunity from liability for actions of its agents engaged in necessary governmental functions.
It is the opinion of the Court that all issues presented are controlled by Anderson v. Vanderslice, 240 Miss. 55, 126 So.2d 522 (1961), which requires the cause to be affirmed.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
4 cases
-
Burton v. Waller
...matters pertaining to the police powers of the city.' Anderson v. Vanderslice, 240 Miss. 55, 126 So.2d 522 (1961). Accord, Twiner v. Jenkins, 257 So.2d 488 (Miss.1972); Simpson v. Poindexter, 241 Miss. 854, 133 So.2d 286 (1961); City of Hattiesburg v. Buckalew, 240 Miss. 323, 127 So.2d 428 ......
-
Hamilton v. Chaffin
...torts of its police officers committed while engaged solely in matters pertaining to the police powers of the city, e.g., Twiner v. Jenkins,257 So.2d 488 (Miss.1972); Simpson v. Poindexter, 241 Miss. 854, 133 So.2d 286 (1961); Anderson v. Vanderslice, 240 Miss. 55, 126 So.2d 522 (1961). The......
-
Davis v. Little
...criticism the doctrine of governmental immunity is applicable in Mississippi. Jackson v. Smith, 309 So.2d 520 (Miss.1975); Twiner v. Jenkins, 257 So.2d 488 (Miss.1972); Anderson v. Vanderslice, 240 Miss. 55, 126 So.2d 522 (1961). However, a distinction must be drawn between the doctrine of ......
-
Jackson v. Smith, 47939
...the doctrine of governmental immunity by judicial decision. Anderson v. Vanderslice, 240 Miss. 55, 126 So.2d 522 (1961); Twiner v. Jenkins, 257 So.2d 488 (Miss.1972). Appellants assign as error the action of the trial court in sustaining the objection to a hypothetical question propounded t......