Section 9.25 Discretionary-Ministerial Distinction

• Library: Local Government Deskbook (2017 Ed.)

C. (§9.25) Discretionary-Ministerial Distinction

Discretionary functions are protected by official immunity; ministerial functions are not.

Discretionary functions are those “necessarily requiring the exercise of reason in the adaption of means to an end, and discretion in determining how or whether an act should be done or a course pursued.” Jackson v. Wilson, 581 S.W.2d 39, 43 (Mo. App. W.D. 1979). “Discretion and judgment are synonymous.” Green v. Denison, 738 S.W.2d 861, 865 (Mo. banc 1987). In Kanagawa v. State by and Through Freeman, 685 S.W.2d 831, 836 (Mo. banc 1985), the Supreme Court gave three examples of factors to be weighed in determining whether an official’s acts are discretionary: “[T]he nature of the official’s duties, the extent to which the acts involve policymaking or the exercise of professional expertise and judgment, and the likely consequences of withholding immunity.”

Ministerial functions are those “of a clerical nature which a public officer is required to perform upon a given state of facts, in a prescribed manner, in obedience to the mandate of legal authority...