City of Tybee Island v. Harrod
337 Ga. App. 523
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Michael Harrod was arrested and convicted for public intoxication and disorderly conduct and then sued the City of Tybee Island for assault and battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress arising from his arrest.
- A jury returned a verdict for Harrod and awarded monetary damages against the City.
- The City argued at summary judgment and in directed verdict motions that sovereign immunity barred Harrod’s claims because any waiver of immunity required proof that the City's GIRMA insurance covered the conduct.
- The trial court denied the City’s summary judgment and directed verdict motions, concluding factual disputes about whether sovereign immunity was waived should go to the jury.
- On appeal the appellate court held the trial court erred by failing to decide, as a threshold legal jurisdictional issue, whether sovereign immunity was waived by the City’s GIRMA coverage and whether Harrod’s claims fell within that coverage.
- The appellate court vacated the judgment and remanded for the trial court to determine jurisdiction (i.e., whether the GIRMA policy waived sovereign immunity as to Harrod’s claims); if no waiver is found, the judgment for Harrod must be set aside.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sovereign immunity is a threshold jurisdictional issue | Harrod argued the City waived immunity by purchasing GIRMA coverage and factual issues should go to the jury | City argued sovereign immunity bars suit unless Harrod proves his claims fall within GIRMA coverage | Court held sovereign immunity is a subject-matter jurisdiction question that the trial court must decide as a threshold legal issue |
| Whether purchase of GIRMA coverage constitutes waiver of sovereign immunity | Harrod relied on precedent that buying GIRMA coverage waives immunity to the extent of coverage | City contended Harrod failed to prove his causes of action are within the policy’s coverage terms | Court acknowledged GIRMA purchase can waive immunity but required the trial court to determine if Harrod’s claims fall within policy coverage before trial proceeds |
| Whether factual disputes about waiver may be submitted to the jury | Harrod allowed submission of factual issues to jury | City argued the jurisdictional question should not be submitted to the jury but resolved by the court | Court held the trial court erred by submitting jurisdictional waiver issues to the jury instead of resolving them preliminarily |
| Remedy when subject-matter jurisdiction is lacking | Harrod sought to retain jury verdict if factual issues resolved in his favor | City sought dismissal or judgment if no waiver exists | Court vacated judgment and remanded; if trial court finds no jurisdiction, prior judgment must be set aside; otherwise judgment may be reinstated and is appealable |
Key Cases Cited
- Dept. of Transp. v. Dupree, 256 Ga. App. 668 (discusses sovereign immunity as a jurisdictional threshold issue)
- Owens v. City of Greenville, 290 Ga. 557 (purchase of GIRMA coverage can constitute waiver of sovereign immunity to extent of coverage)
- CSX Transp. v. City of Garden City, 277 Ga. 248 (plaintiff must prove facts fall within insurance coverage that effects waiver)
- Bd. of Regents of Univ. System of Ga. v. Daniels, 264 Ga. 328 (coverage-based waiver principles)
- Derbyshire v. United Builders Supplies, 194 Ga. App. 840 (trial court must determine jurisdiction rather than submit to jury; judgment must fall if no jurisdiction)
- Gonzalez v. Ga. Dept. of Transp., 329 Ga. App. 224 (remand appropriate when jurisdictional waiver unresolved)
- Glass v. Gates, 311 Ga. App. 563 (similar procedural guidance on jurisdictional determinations)