Abstract

One of the most significant and far-reaching decisions of recent years was handed down by the Arizona Supreme Court in 1963. In Stone v. Arizona State Highway Comn'n, the court completely changed the law relating to tort liability, for the state of Arizona and its agencies and subdivisions. The case involved a suit against the State Highway Commission and its members, the state highway engineers, and others, for wrongful death and injuries arising out of an auto accident resulting from faulty markings on a state highway. The trial court had held that, under the established doctrine of governmental immunity from tort liability, the complaint failed to state a cause of action. On appeal, the Arizona Supreme Court held that the substantive defense of governmental immunity from tort liability was abolished, not only in the case at hand and future cases, but also for all pending cases and those not barred by the statute of limitations. Probably representing the most extreme departure from the protection of governmental immunity of any state in the United States, the decision would abolish immunity for all public bodies in the state of Arizona from the highest (the state) on down to the lowest public entity.

The purpose of this comment is three-fold: (1) to give a brief survey of the background of the doctrine of governmental immunity; (2) to review the rationale of some decisions in other states on the issue of governmental immunity; (3) and to examine Arizona's position at this time and discuss some of the potential problems which will confront public bodies in the state and- suggest some possible solutions to these problems.

How to Cite