Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Ritchie v. Turner

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided November 1, 2018No. 2017-SC-000157-DGPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

KELLER, J., CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART:

I concur with the majority opinion's holding that there can be both ministerial and discretionary components to the duty to report. However, I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion's analysis and conclusion that the school officials' duties in this case were discretionary. I believe the majority overlooks important precedent in immunity law and erroneously relies on cases that are clearly distinguishable. I also hold that the majority has too broadly expanded our immunity law.

IMMUNITY: MINISTERIAL V. DISCRETIONARY

The school…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Yanero v. DavisKentucky Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Pathways, Inc. v. HammonsKentucky Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Rowan County v. SloasKentucky Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Mullins v. Commonwealth Life Insurance Co.Kentucky Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Osborne v. KeeneyKentucky Supreme Court · 2012

13 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