Sovereign Immunity: History and Modern Laws

Sovereign Immunity: History and Modern Laws

Sovereign Immunity: History and Modern Laws

Sovereign Immunity is a legal term that might appear when filing a Personal Injury Claim with a California Attorney. It will generally be used in situations where the claim can’t be filed because of an underlying legal code that protects governmental agencies and employees from prosecution. This legal doctrine essentially prohibits citizens from suing a governmental entity unless the lawmaking authority allows it. Giving permission to be sued is understandably confusing. Information about the history of this legal concept is helpful for injured people who are learning about its existence the hard way.

Immunity from prosecution isn’t a familiar legal concept to many members of the general public. It’s easy to get taken off-guard when learning about this provision for the first time. Unfortunately, this usually happens when there is a legal claim for an injury to be filed. Critics are quick to point out how much potential damage can be done to the public if the government considers itself to be effectively exempt from its own laws. Arguments in favor of this institutional immunity claim that the public interest is served more effectively if there is no threat of lawsuits from the public against the governmental agencies or employees. One thing is for certain: This legal issue is far from settled.

Injury on Government Property, Immunity in CA

Under the Tort Claims Act in the state of California, the government doesn’t exercise complete immunity for tort and personal injury claims. However, there are many procedural hurdles that must be correctly handled for the case to proceed. This will often halt the lawsuit before it ever reaches the courts; this is where a good attorney can help.

Premises liability and slip-and-fall accidents are examples of the kinds of cases that might instigate litigation for a personal injury sustained on government property. Immunity against the lawsuit can take the injured party off-guard, and it’s often hard to know how to proceed. This legal principle has been subjected to scrutiny and challenges, but has yet to be completely reversed or overturned.

Legal Principle of Immunity for Sovereign Entities

Legal principles are often set through a precedent that was previously applied. However, over time, the context of the original law is often interpreted in a new light, and perceptions tend to change with experience. How laws are applied and translated into practice is iterative; time often reveals many unexpected outcomes in how the law is put into practice. This is an important component of the legal concept of immunity from prosecution. For example, this is a legal precedent that actually dates back hundreds of years.

Historical Background of Sovereign Immunity

The concept of immunity for a sovereign entity began in the feudal laws of Europe. This was intended to protect royalty and nobility against claims of injury or wrongdoing against the lower classes. Such claims were fought by the landed aristocracies who wished to maintain their immunity from any prosecution. This idea was somehow transferred into certain legal codes within the United States in order to protect the government from claims of injury or wrong doing by the public.

This particular form of immunity was articulated as a concept of public interest being best served when the government agencies and employees achieved legal exemption from any liabilities or claims of injury. Such a dubious legal precedent has many angles to challenge, but it has yet to be completely reversed. The next best thing to revoking this legal doctrine is to hire an aggressive law firm that is committed to representing the interests of the public against injury and wrongdoing, even against governmental entities and employees.

Legal Precedents and Changes

Laws are not immutable, so changes in laws are always possible; however, this takes time. Historically, many laws have been repealed when deemed to be unjust, unethical or harmful to specific groups of people. The intent of many laws matters less than the outcomes experienced in real time. As recently as 1963, this immunity law was changed to allow for personal injury claims against the government under certain conditions. This opened the door for the public to litigate against the state of California in situations where there was an injury occurring on a property that is under the control of some public entity.

It also made room for legal cases against the government if the conditions on the property were dangerous and could have reasonably been addressed. Negligence was no longer completely shielded by this immunity doctrine. Future changes might also be made under the right conditions. However, until the public exerts such political will so as to change these laws, the next logical step is to hire an experienced legal advocate to represent your interests. The issue of liability for an injury is always a battleground, and no one should go into this fight unprepared.

Immunity from Prosecution, Exceptions

Government property can confer this particular type of immunity, even if the injury was clearly the fault of a governmental authority or employee. There is a range of examples where this kind of legal immunity could apply. For example, public facilities, airports, post offices, neglected highways and governmental buildings under construction could all be immune from injury cases. This effectively limits the ability of citizens to make claims of damages by the government.

The ability of the Personal Injury Attorney to get the governmental authority to allow the lawsuit to proceed can be a complex matter. A California Attorney who believes in tort law reform is most likely to be sympathetic to the difficulties you face by attempting to gain accommodation from the government to file a Personal Injury Claim. This is why you need the help of the most experienced and knowledgeable California Attorney to handle the Negligent or At Fault claim.

Personal Injury Attorney

Negligent or At Fault claims against a government wielding Sovereign Immunity must be handled in an immaculate manner; there is no room for mistakes. This kind of legal case should only be given to the most qualified California Attorney with a long track record of litigating a Personal Injury Claim against a governmental entity attempting to exercise this shield of immunity. The rules that govern the lawsuit will follow a different set of rules than other cases in which the Negligent or At Fault party doesn’t wield Sovereign Immunity.

There are ways to continue filing the claim even in cases where it’s being filed against a governmental agency or employee protected by the arcane Sovereign Immunity protection. After all, it originated in mediaeval England in order to protect royalty against legal actions by serfs and peasants. This legal doctrine was adopted in California to limit the liability of a governmental agency or an employee of the government, and it can’t be overturned unless successfully challenged.

Filing a Notice of Claim in California

The California Department of General Services has an Office of Risk and Insurance Management that handles claims against the state. The filing process must be completed accurately and within the specified deadlines. Any mistakes or errors on the application could result in the claim being rejected. This is why it’s important to hire a qualified legal advocate to ensure that all paperwork relating to claims and court documents are handled correctly.

Even if there are no claim forms, there are still specific procedures that must be followed. These rules aren’t instantly accessible to the general public, and this might result in confusion or additional mistakes. For example, in some locations where there is no claim form available, you would be required to create a notice of claim manually. There are a series of requirements that must appear on this manual notice of claim. This includes the mailing address, location and description of the incident, governmental employees involved, claim loss amounts and other details.

In addition, there is likely to be a deadline imposed on the filing of the claim; in California, this time window is usually around six months after the alleged injury occurred. The California Attorney can advise you on how to submit a complete notice of claim in order to avoid delays or rejections. Notice of claim forms will receive a response in around 45 days; this will allow the claimant to know if the governmental entity agrees to allow the case to be filed in the courts.

Our Firm, Personal Injury Attorney

Filing a liability claim in a California court against a governmental authority or employee for a claim also requires specific procedures to be followed. By this time, the paperwork can easily become a burden on the claimant. Many people suffering from injuries will be ill-equipped to handle the many layers of bureaucracy. Our legal services are invaluable when navigating through multiple layers of paperwork for a Negligent or At Fault legal case.

Our legal team understands how to win these cases by discovering the evidence that will enable your case to proceed and prevail in court. We are experienced litigators, and we understand many of the more obscure nuances in the California legal code. We leverage all of this knowledge, research and experience to advocate on behalf of members of the public who were injured on government or public property.