Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Sullins v. American Medical Response of Oklahoma, Inc.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided February 20, 2001No. 95,047Published

1ConcurrenceOpala, J.

11 The court holds today that a private entity is not a public trust's "agency" within the meaning of the Governmental Tort Claims Act merely because it is contractually obligated to a public trust to provide the latter with services. I concur in the court's bottom-line answer but not in its pronouncement. The determinative issue here is whether the defendant American Medical Response of Oklahoma, Inc. [AMR] may *265claim implied immunity from tort liability as a municipal ageney. Just as the court does today, I would also answer in the negative. My bottom line is that EMSA (a public trust) lacks…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Imbler v. PachtmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Malley v. BriggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Butz v. EconomouSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  5. Clinton v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997

20 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