Johnny KEY

Summary

The court held that the appellants could pursue an interlocutory appeal from the denial of their sovereign-immunity motion and that the complaint was barred because the requested relief would control the State Board's actions. The allegations did not establish that the Board acted outside its statutory authority, that the governing statute was unconstitutional, or that the Board acted arbitrarily, capriciously, in bad faith, or wantonly. The court therefore reversed the circuit court and dismissed the complaint. Hart, J., concurring, would additionally bar the arbitrary-and-capricious challenge for failure to exhaust administrative and judicial remedies.