MONROE, Judge.
AFFIRMED. NO OPINION.
See Rule 53(a)(1) and (a)(2)(F), Ala.R.App.P.; Tuscaloosa County v. Henderson, 699 So.2d 1274 (Ala.Civ.App. 1997);Tuscaloosa County v. Teaster, 770 So.2d 598 (Ala.Civ.App. 1999); and White v. Searcy, 634 So.2d 577 (Ala.Civ.App. 1994).
Robertson, P.J., and Yates, and Thompson, JJ., concur.
Crawley, J., dissents.
CRAWLEY, Judge, dissenting.
I conclude that the county and Tinsley are entitled to discretionary function immunity. See Tuscaloosa County v. Teaster, 770 So.2d 598 (Ala.Civ.App. 1999) (Crawley, J., dissenting); and Tuscaloosa County v. Henderson, 699 So.2d 1274 (Ala.Civ.App. 1997).