Plaintiff's contention is based on the novel theory that no claim could be asserted against her personally because she was a county employee and, pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-20-205, her act of remitting the child support funds to the wrong recipient removed the County's immunity. Thus, relying on the holding in Drake v. Manson, 1999 WL 767722, *2 (Tenn. Ct. App. Sept. 29, 1999), she reasons that she became immune when the County lost its immunity. As Plaintiff correctly notes, when the government's immunity is removed under the GTLA, a corresponding immunity is conferred on the government employee, in this case Plaintiff. Drake, 1999 WL 767722, *2 (Tenn. Ct. App. Sept. 29, 1999) ("because when the immunity from suit normally enjoyed by governmental entities is removed under the provisions of the [GTLA] . . . a corresponding immunity is conferred upon the government employees whose alleged negligence gave rise to the cause of action.").