810 S.E.2d 649
Ga. Ct. App.2018Background
- On March 31, 2014, Gordon County deputy Richard Morrison, driving a county-owned vehicle, collided with Steven Davis’s pickup while Davis was making a left turn; Davis suffered multiple injuries.
- Davis sent an ante-litem notice to Gordon County (via certified mail) on September 24, 2014, then sued Morrison and Gordon County on March 4, 2016; he did not serve Sheriff Mitch Ralston with ante-litem notice or the complaint.
- Morrison and Gordon County moved for summary judgment arguing OCGA § 36-92-3(a) bars individual suits against local officers for torts involving covered vehicles and that ante-litem notice to the sheriff was lacking.
- Davis voluntarily dismissed Gordon County before the court ruled; the trial court granted summary judgment for Morrison.
- On appeal Davis argued (1) § 36-92-3(a) does not apply to sheriff’s deputies because sheriff’s offices are not defined as “local government entity,” and (2) any claim against the sheriff is barred because he did not serve ante-litem notice on the sheriff.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding § 36-92-3(a) bars the suit against the deputy and that ante-litem notice is required for claims against a sheriff sued in his official capacity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether OCGA § 36-92-3(a) bars an individual suit against a county sheriff’s deputy for negligence while driving a county vehicle | § 36-92-3(a) should not apply to sheriff’s deputies because the statutes define “local government entity” in a way that excludes sheriff’s offices | § 36-92-3(a) plainly immunizes any local government officer or employee who commits a tort involving a covered motor vehicle while performing official duties | Court: § 36-92-3(a) applies and bars Davis’s suit against Morrison individually |
| Whether failure to serve ante-litem notice on the sheriff bars a claim against the sheriff in his official capacity | Ante-litem notice to various county officials suffices; service on the sheriff was unnecessary | OCGA § 36-11-1 requires ante-litem notice to the sheriff when sued in official capacity; failure to serve the sheriff is fatal | Court: Ante-litem notice to the sheriff is required; failure to serve the sheriff bars such claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Wilcox v. Fenn, 289 Ga. 750 (holding OCGA § 36-92-3(a) barred suit against individual county officers)
- DeLoach v. Elliott, 289 Ga. 319 (same principle applied to city officers)
- Strength v. Lovett, 311 Ga. App. 35 (county sheriff waived county immunity re: deputy’s negligent use of county vehicle)
- Gilbert v. Richardson, 264 Ga. 744 (suits against a sheriff in official capacity are suits against the county for immunity purposes)
- Columbia County v. Branton, 304 Ga. App. 149 (OCGA § 36-11-1 ante-litem requirement applies to sheriffs sued in official capacity)