Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

SMITH v. CITY OF STILLWATER

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided May 20, 2014No. 111971Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWatt, J.

T1 I agree that, under the unique facts presented in this case, the respondents/ap-pellees have no liability for the injury or death resulting from the high-speed chase instituted here. Nevertheless, I cannot go so far as to extend blanket immunity to all *1206governmental employees and entities where the fleeing individual, allegedly involved in criminal activity, is injured. To do so, would require that we overrule our opinion in State ex rel. Oklahoma Dept. of Public Safety v. Gurich, 2010 OK 56, 288 P.3d 1. It would also put me in the position of ignoring the precise language of 47 0.8.2011 $…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Fuller v. OdomSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1987
  2. Keating v. EdmondsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2001
  3. Minie v. HudsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1997
  4. Oglesby v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1992
  5. Oklahoma Ass'n for Equitable Taxation v. City of Oklahoma CitySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API