Edgerton v. Clinton

Summary

The court held that the town was protected by governmental immunity because the information available to the 911 dispatcher did not make it objectively apparent that failing to stop the vehicle pursuit would likely subject Hopkins to imminent harm. The court concluded that the identifiable person-imminent harm exception therefore did not apply and did not reach proximate cause. The judgment was reversed as to the town, with direction to render judgment for the town, and affirmed in all other respects.