City of Jackson, Mississippi v. Robert Sandifer, Jr. and Mildred Sandifer, Individually and on Behalf of the Wrongful Death Beneficiaries of Tawanda Sandifer

Summary

The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed a wrongful-death judgment against the City of Jackson under the Mississippi Tort Claims Act. The court held that the alleged criminal sexual conduct of two police officers was outside the course and scope of employment, that the investigation and disciplinary decisions were discretionary functions, and that the alleged failures did not constitute reckless disregard. The court reversed the circuit court’s judgment and rendered judgment in favor of the City.

Holdings

1. The City is not liable under the MTCA for employee conduct that constitutes a criminal offense because the statute excludes such conduct from the course and scope of employment and bars governmental-entity liability for it.
2. The alleged sexual conduct by Clark and Talton was outside the course and scope of their employment because the officers were pursuing personal, unsanctioned recreational endeavors rather than furthering JPD's business.
3. The City's decisions concerning whether and how to investigate Tawanda's allegations and whether to discipline Clark were discretionary functions protected by MTCA immunity.
4. An inadequate investigation or failure to investigate constitutes negligence, not reckless disregard, and therefore does not overcome the MTCA immunity applicable to police-protection activities.
5. The City is immune from liability based on the alleged failures of Clark and Talton to follow JPD policies or general orders concerning runaway or missing persons because the evidence did not establish reckless disregard.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the City of Jackson was immune under the Mississippi Tort Claims Act from liability for alleged criminal sexual conduct by JPD officers.
2. Whether the alleged sexual conduct of JPD officers occurred within the course and scope of their employment.
3. Whether JPD's investigation and disciplinary decisions concerning allegations against an officer were discretionary functions protected by governmental immunity.
4. Whether an inadequate investigation or failure to investigate constituted reckless disregard under the MTCA police-protection exception.
5. Whether alleged violations of JPD policies concerning runaways constituted reckless disregard sufficient to overcome MTCA immunity.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded