Mississippi high court: Lawsuit barred over school resource officer’s death

Two sons of a school resource officer killed in 2022 while directing traffic outside a school can’t sue Mississippi over an inoperable warning sign, as their father’s death is subject to the state’s exclusive remedy provision, the Mississippi Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Johnny Patterson, who was an employee of the Lee County School District, was survived by his wife, who received workers compensation survivor benefits from the school district. His two adult sons, who did not receive any benefits, sued the Mississippi Department of Transportation in 2023, alleging it had “failed to maintain, inspect, and repair the traffic signal and that it had failed to warn of a dangerous condition,” says Cody Patterson And Corey Patterson, individually and on behalf of the wrongful death beneficiaries of Johnny Patterson V. State of Mississippi, ex rel. Attorney General Lynn Fitch and Mississippi Department Of Transportation.

“Specifically, the sons claimed that the traffic light had failed to flash and to warn motorists of the upcoming speed and school zone,” court records say, adding that the sons sought damages “for their own pain and suffering, emotional and mental distress, and loss of society and companionship.”

MDOT moved for summary judgment, arguing that “as a state-government entity, it was immune from suit because Patterson’s employer, Lee County School District, had paid workers’ compensation benefits and was another state-government entity.” The trial court agreed.

On appeal, the sons argued that the exclusive remedy defense is inapplicable and that if it is applicable, it is unconstitutional both at the state and federal levels.

The state’s highest court affirmed the lower court ruling, writing that the under the “clear language of the statute, a wrongful death beneficiary is only allowed to bring claims that the decedent could have brought if the decedent had survived” and that “in order to bring a claim against MDOT, the sons must ‘stand in the position of their decedent,’ which is (Mr.) Patterson.”

It added that the court has held that the immunity provision in state law “states plainly ‘that the governmental entity will not be liable to any claimant who is an employee of a governmental entity’” and “that because (Mr.) Patterson, an employee of a governmental entity, would not have been able to bring a claim against MDOT, his sons cannot stand in his position to do so.”

On the constitutionality of the state exclusive remedy provision, the court wrote “the sons did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that (exclusive remedy) violated the remedy clause within Mississippi’s Constitution or the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. Therefore, we find that the sons did not overcome the strong presumption of constitutional validity, and we affirm the trial court’s order upholding the constitutionality of the statute.”