Calvin Johnson

Summary

Justice Danielson dissented, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction over the interlocutory appeal because the circuit court's order did not expressly rule on sovereign immunity. He reasoned that the motion presented separate Rule 12(b)(6) and sovereign-immunity issues, and that the court could not presume a ruling on the latter from the order's unexplained denial. The dissent would dismiss the appeal without prejudice. Justice Hart, dissenting, likewise would dismiss or remand for an express ruling, while Special Justice Dobson, concurring, agreed with reversal but would reach sovereign immunity on a different rationale.