of the state. Our interpretation today is consistent with previous decisions construing the same phrase. In determining the state departments and agencies that are entitled to sovereign immunity, this Court has never restricted the defense or its waiver to entities with the words “department” or “agency” in their title. Instead, we have held that the terms apply to state political subdivisions and governmental entities, including the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia and counties. Likewise, we have held that the phrase in the 1991 amendment does not apply to municipalities or local hospital authorities because they are neither the state nor a department or agency of the state. Based on the language and legislative history of the 19 217 Ga. 712 (124 SE2d 733) (1962) (<HOLDING>); State Ports Auth. v. Arnall, 201 Ga. 713 (41
holding that the but for test applied in a mixed motive case under the national labor relations act holding that the nlrb was a creditor within the meaning of the code because it had been granted the power to enforce the national labor relations act even though a back pay award was made to individual workers not to the government holding that a district court may have jurisdiction over action taken by the national labor relations board despite an express statutory finality provision when the agency has acted in excess of its delegated powers and contrary to a specific prohibition in the national labor relations act holding ports authority was not an employer subject to the jurisdiction of the national labor relations board holding that two entities were a single employer and therefore that their gross receipts could be totaled together to establish jurisdiction under the national labor relations act