Order Denying Motion To Dismiss
Order Denying Motion To Dismiss
Order Denying Motion To Dismiss
SHAD WHITE,
STATE AUDITOR OF MISSISSIPPI DEFENDANT
4] filed by Defendant, Shad White, on January 26, 2021. The Court, having considered oral
arguments from February 8, 2022, reviewed the pleadings and other papers, and being otherwise
fully advised in the premises, finds that the motion should be denied.
FACTS
On December 30, 2020, Plaintiff, James Thomas, filed a defamation suit against Defendant,
Shad White, individually and in his official capacity as the State Auditor of Mississippi. [Docket
Item 2.] In his Complaint, Plaintiff asserts defamtion per se and sets forth a detailed timeline of
events alleging that Defendant White made repeated, blatantly false statements about Plaintiff and
his ability and integrity to carry out his employment. Id. Plaintiff, also, included a request for a
On January 26, 2021, Defendant filed his Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. #4], which
STANDARD OF REVIEW
A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Mississippi Rules
of Civil Procedure challenges the legal sufficiency of the complaint. J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc. v.
1
Case: 25CI1:20-cv-00806-EFP Document #: 17 Filed: 09/02/2022 Page 2 of 3
Forrest Gen. Hosp., 34 So. 3d 1171 (Miss. 2010). A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim
is reviewed on the face of the pleadings alone. Walton v. Walton, 52 So. 3d 468, 471 (Miss. Ct.
App. 2011). In determining whether to dismiss a lawsuit for failure to state a claim, “[t]he
allegations in the complaint must be taken as true, and there must be no set of facts that would
OPINION
In his motion to dismiss, defense counsel argued (1) that Shad White’s statements were
privileged under the doctrine of absolute immunity, as at the time he was a state governmental
official and (2) that declaratory judgment is improper in this context and/or is not ripe for
adjudication. Plaintiff opposed both arguments and requested a ruling on his declaratory judgment.
I. Immunity
Mississippi law is clear on the type of immunity held by state governmental officials.
[A]n officer of the law has no absolute privilege for any and all comments which he
makes. An absolutely privileged communication is one made in the interest of the
public service or the administration of justice, and in practical effect is limited to
legislative, judicial and military proceedings. The applicable privilege might be
described as qualified.
Krebs v. McNeal, 222 Miss. 560 (Miss. 1955) (emphasis added).
Hence, Shad White is not entitled to absolute immunity for any and all statements which
he makes as a state governmental official. Id. see Staheli v. Smith, 548 So. 2d 1299 (Miss. 1989);
see also McGehee v. DePoyster, 708 So. 2d 77, 81 (Miss. 1998). That blanket theory of immunity
has not been recognized by our courts, nor does it comport with the laws of this state. Id. see MISS.
CODE ANN. 11-46-1 et seq. Further, to the continued detriment of defense’s argument, our courts
2
Case: 25CI1:20-cv-00806-EFP Document #: 17 Filed: 09/02/2022 Page 3 of 3
have stated that immunity does not extend to fraud, malice, libel, slander, defamation or any
means his repeated and alleged false statements require a level of review by this Court. Notably,
during the hearing, the Court heard arguments on whether Defendant White’s statements might be
classified as an “absolute privileged communication” or put another way, whether his statements
exceeded his qualified privilege. However, addressing said arguments would require the Court to
convert this motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment and to rely solely on the
declaratory relief is barred by the doctrine of absolute immunity. The Court declines to address the
remaining arguments, as Plaintiff’s request for declaratory judgment is not otherwise improper.
CONCLUSION
The Court finds that the allegations as stated in Plaintiff’s Complaint are sufficiently pled.
The Court, further, finds that declaratory relief is an available remedy, though premature at this
hereby DENIED.
2nd of ____________,
SO ORDERED, this the ___day September 2022.
_________________________________
CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE
HONORABLE E. FAYE PETERSON