Practice question
A plaintiff names only a department secretary as defendant but seeks an order requiring payment from the national treasury for authorized official acts. No applicable consent to suit is shown. Does naming the officer alone necessarily avoid State immunity?
- No; the court must consider whether the requested judgment would in substance require an affirmative act by the State.
- Yes; the caption alone always determines whether the State is being sued.
- Yes; treasury payment is irrelevant to the nature of the suit.
- No; every suit against any public employee is invariably a suit against the State.
- Yes; every authorized official act is legally the officer’s private act.
Legal references
- United States of America v. Guinto, G.R. Nos. 76607, 79470, 80018 and 80258, February 26, 1990, main decision, restrictive immunity and suability distinguished from liability: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1990/feb1990/gr_76607_1990.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.