You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Farmer v. Troy Univ.

Citation: Not availableDocket: 457PA19-2

Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina; November 4, 2022; North Carolina; State Supreme Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, a former employee of Troy University, an Alabama state institution operating in North Carolina, filed a lawsuit alleging wrongful termination, sexual harassment, and other tort claims. The university invoked sovereign immunity, arguing that it could not be sued in North Carolina's courts. However, the court found that Troy University had waived its sovereign immunity by registering as a nonprofit corporation in North Carolina and engaging in commercial activities, including student recruitment. The court distinguished between commercial activities, which are subject to suit, and governmental functions, which may retain immunity. Troy University's actions were deemed commercial, thus subject to legal action. The court's decision relied on precedents, notably Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, which affirmed that states retain sovereign immunity unless explicitly waived. Despite the motion to dismiss based on sovereign immunity, the court concluded that the university consented to be treated as a domestic corporation in North Carolina. Consequently, the court reversed the lower court's decision, allowing the lawsuit to proceed on the grounds of Troy University's waiver of sovereign immunity for its business operations in North Carolina.

Legal Issues Addressed

Application of Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt

Application: The case applied the precedent from Hyatt, determining that states generally retain sovereign immunity from private suits in other states unless explicitly waived.

Reasoning: Hyatt III overruled Nevada v. Hall, directly addressing the issue of state sovereign immunity in tort actions.

Commercial vs. Governmental Functions

Application: The court distinguished between Troy University's commercial activities, which are subject to suit, and governmental activities, which may retain immunity.

Reasoning: Thus, the distinction lies in the nature of the activities being challenged: nongovernmental activities are subject to suit while governmental activities may not be.

Legal Criteria for Waiver of Sovereign Immunity

Application: The court noted that sovereign immunity waivers must be explicit, as established in U.S. Supreme Court precedent.

Reasoning: This waiver must be explicit, as established in Sossamon v. Texas and College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board; however, the Court of Appeals' conclusion that such clauses cannot constitute an explicit waiver is not supported by U.S. Supreme Court precedent.

Sovereign Immunity and Waiver

Application: The court concluded that Troy University waived its sovereign immunity by operating as a nonprofit corporation in North Carolina and accepting the 'sue and be sued' clause under the North Carolina Nonprofit Corporation Act.

Reasoning: Troy University has explicitly waived its sovereign immunity from suit in North Carolina by registering as a nonprofit corporation and accepting the sue and be sued clause in the North Carolina Nonprofit Corporation Act.