In Vanderpool v. State, 1983 OK 82, 672 P.2d 1153, the Oklahoma Supreme Court explained, "the doctrine of sovereign immunity was first recognized in early England and required that the sovereign could not be sued without his permission." Vanderpool, 672 P.2d at 1154. "The doctrine found its way into the common law of the United States, and in 1821, in Cohens v. Virginia, Chief Justice Marshall applied it in suits against the United States, declaring that suits could not be commenced or prosecuted against the federal government without its consent. Subsequently, the doctrine was applied to the states." Id. The Court explained that at the state level, "it was early recognized that local government entities occupy a dual character . . . ." Id. On one hand, a state is "charged with governmental functions and responsibilities," and on the other it is "a corporate body, capable of much the same acts as a private corporation . . . ." Id. "This duality resulted in the attempted differentiation between governmental and proprietary functions, the first generally protected by immunity, the second generally not." Id. (footnote omitted). The Court explained that this differentiation proved to be too cumbersome, and "resulted in confusion and uncertainty . . . ." Id. The Court, therefore, held "that the governmental-proprietary-function inquiry shall no longer be determinative in assessing liability for tort as to all levels of government in this State," id., and abrogated common-law sovereign immunity for injury caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any governmental entity or any employee or agent of the governmental entity while acting within the scope of employment, id.