James B. Hanks, M.p.h., Pro Se v. Jane Marie Sneed (Arkansas 2006)

Summary

The court affirmed dismissal of Hanks's claims against the state employees because official-capacity claims were barred by sovereign immunity and the employees were protected by statutory immunity. It treated the dismissal as a summary-judgment ruling for two defendants because the circuit court considered materials outside the pleadings, and affirmed that ruling. The court also affirmed the agency decision that Hanks failed the practical examination, while declining to review issues on which neither the circuit court nor the agency had made a specific ruling.

Holding

Sovereign and statutory immunity. The claims against the appellees in their official capacities were barred by sovereign immunity because they were claims against the State and sought relief implicating state financial resources. The individual state employees were also entitled to statutory immunity because Hanks neither alleged liability coverage nor showed malicious acts or omissions.

Conversion of dismissal to summary judgment. As to the two defendants whose motion included affidavits considered by the circuit court, the dismissal was properly treated as a grant of summary judgment rather than solely as a pleading dismissal.

Agency decision denying EMT certification. The Board's decision upholding the denial of Hanks's EMT certification was affirmed because Hanks failed the required practical examination and did not establish a reviewable unlawful procedure or other basis for setting aside the agency decision.

Preservation of issues lacking specific rulings. The court declined to consider arguments that lacked a specific ruling by the circuit court or the Board, including challenges involving the examination rules, constitutional claims, freedom-of-information issues, and other asserted violations.

James B. Hanks, M.p.h., Pro Se v. Jane Marie Sneed

Summary

Holding

Cited authorities

Cited by