BARNETT Et Al. v. ATLANTA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL SYSTEM Et Al.
792 S.E.2d 474
Ga. Ct. App.2016Background
- On Oct. 14, 2008, APS teacher Phyllis Caldwell left her classroom during seventh period; while she was away students horseplayed, and student Antoine Williams later collapsed and died from a catastrophic injury.
- Caldwell initially lied about being present; an independent APS investigation concluded she had left the room and had asked a neighboring teacher (Kanu) to “listen out” for her class during her first absence.
- Appellants (Barnett and Williams) sued Caldwell in her individual capacity for wrongful death, alleging she violated Section 6.5 of the school handbook: "Students are never to be left in the classroom unsupervised by an APS certified employee." Caldwell acknowledged awareness of the policy.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for Caldwell, holding her decision to leave the classroom concerned supervision — a discretionary act — and thus she was entitled to official immunity.
- Appellants argued Section 6.5 created a ministerial, non‑discretionary duty that negated official immunity; the Court of Appeals affirmed, finding Caldwell exercised discretion in relying on the neighboring teacher to monitor her class.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Caldwell is entitled to official immunity for leaving the classroom despite Section 6.5 | Section 6.5 imposed a clear, mandatory ministerial duty not to leave students unsupervised, so official immunity does not apply | Supervision and classroom control are discretionary functions; Caldwell exercised judgment (asked neighboring teacher to "listen out"), so official immunity applies | Court held the act was discretionary and affirmed summary judgment for Caldwell (official immunity applies) |
| Whether violation of a written school policy (Section 6.5) automatically converts the act into a ministerial duty | A written policy creates an absolute duty, removing immunity | A written policy does not automatically eliminate discretion; the character of the specific act governs | Court held a written policy does not automatically create a ministerial duty; here discretion remained, so immunity applies |
Key Cases Cited
- Leone v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC, 311 Ga. App. 702 (summary judgment standard)
- Coffee Cty. School Dist. v. Snipes, 216 Ga. App. 293 (recognizing teacher immunity under constitutional amendment)
- Daniels v. Gordon, 232 Ga. App. 811 (teacher official immunity principles)
- Gilbert v. Richardson, 264 Ga. 744 (defining "official functions" and immunity scope)
- McDowell v. Smith, 285 Ga. 592 (ministerial vs discretionary act discussion)
- Grammens v. Dollar, 287 Ga. 618 (analysis depends on specific action complained of)
- Wright v. Ashe, 220 Ga. App. 91 (supervision of students is discretionary)
- Chamlee v. Henry Cty. Bd. of Educ., 239 Ga. App. 183 (immunity applies even if school policies violated)
- Perkins v. Morgan Cty. Sch. Dist., 222 Ga. App. 831 (similar supervisory immunity ruling)
- Roper v. Greenway, 294 Ga. 112 (written policy can establish ministerial duty in some contexts)
- Davis v. Effingham Cty. Bd. of Comm'rs, 328 Ga. App. 579 (written policy does not automatically create ministerial duty)
- Daley v. Clark, 282 Ga. App. 235 (focus on character of specific actions)
- Guthrie v. Irons, 211 Ga. App. 502 (teachers should be free to exercise judgment in supervision)
- Reece v. Turner, 284 Ga. App. 282 (discretionary supervisory decisions entitled to immunity)