Adame v. City of Surprise (9th Cir. - June 14, 2022)

I don't typically read the syllabus of Ninth Circuit opinions, and prefer to just jump into the opinion itself at the outset. But today, for some reason, my eyes took a glimpse of the first couple of sentences of the syllabus -- which were set off in a separate paragraph -- and it took me for a loop.

The syllabus starts by saying:

"The panel certified to the Supreme Court of Arizona the following questions: 1. Does A.R.S. Section 12-820.05(B) provide immunity from liability? If the latter, the Court need not answer any further questions because our court would lack jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal. If the former, please answer the following additional questions."

After reading this, my brain thought: "Wait. What?"

So I read it again. And again. Confirming that, yep, there's indeed no "former" or "latter" in that paragraph and hence that it didn't make any sense.

When I read the actual opinion, it wasn't until a dozen or so pages through the thing that I came across the words that the syllabus meant to summarize. Which were:

"Does A.R.S. Section 12-820.05(B) provide immunity from suit or only immunity from liability? If the latter, the Court need not answer any further questions because our court would lack jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal. If the former, please answer the following additional questions."

Ah. Now I get it.

Those last five words of the first sentence were omitted from the syllabus, but are fairly important. Now it makes sense.