act, however, calls for the exercise of personal deliberation and judgment, which in turn entails examining the facts, reaching reasoned conclusions, and acting on them in a way not specifically directed.” Hemak v. Houston County School Dist., 220 Ga.App. 110, 469 S.E.2d 679 (1996). The Plaintiff claims that Defendant Duncan should have exercised better judgment when investigating and evaluating the Burrell incident and should have discovered Defendant Mency’s molestation of Plaintiff. The Court finds that disciplining employees and supervising students are discretionary functions and official immunity will shield Defendant Duncan absent evidence that his acts were wilful, malicious, or corrupt. Crisp County School System v. Brown, 226 Ga.App. 800, 803, 487 S.E.2d 512, 516 (1997) (<HOLDING>). There is a total absence of any evidence of
holding that the discretionary function exception may apply in the absence of a conscious decision  holding that an agent acting outside his delegated authority is not protected by the discretionary function exception holding that there is no choice to be protected by the discretionary function exception when a federal statute regulation or policy specifically prescribes a course of action for an employee to follow recognizing a discretionary function exception to that waiver holding teachers duty to monitor students a discretionary function protected by official immunity