Dep't of Labor v. Mcconnell
305 Ga. 812
Ga.2019Background
- In Sept. 2012 the Georgia Department of Labor compiled a spreadsheet with names, SSNs, phone numbers, emails, and ages for 4,757 unemployment-applicants (including McConnell).
- In 2013 a Department employee accidentally emailed the spreadsheet as an attachment to ~1,000 recipients, disclosing those data without consent.
- McConnell sued (individually and as proposed class) alleging negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and invasion of privacy by public disclosure of private facts; he alleged costs and emotional harm but not actual identity theft or criminal misuse.
- The trial court dismissed, finding sovereign immunity barred the suit and that each count failed to state a claim; the Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal on the merits but was later directed by the Supreme Court to decide sovereign-immunity threshold first.
- On remand the Court of Appeals held the GTCA waived sovereign immunity and again dismissed for failure to state claims; the Supreme Court granted certiorari and affirmed the Court of Appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether GTCA waives sovereign immunity for these torts | GTCA waives immunity for torts by state employees acting within scope; McConnell claimed torts under GTCA | Dept: definition of "loss" limits waiver to claims with personal injury/disease/death, so no waiver here | GTCA waived immunity; "loss" definition includes "any other element of actual damages recoverable in actions for negligence" so threshold satisfied |
| Whether complaint states a negligence claim | Dept owed common-law and statutory duty to safeguard personal data; breach caused foreseeable harm and economic/emotional damages | Dept: no recognized general duty to all; statutes cited do not impose tort-enforceable duty for negligent disclosure | Dismissed: no actionable duty pleaded — Bradley Center language rejected; cited statutes do not establish a tort duty for negligent disclosures |
| Whether complaint states breach-of-fiduciary-duty claim | Department employees are public officers under Trustee Clause, creating fiduciary duties to protect information; alternatively, a confidential relationship arose | Dept: Trustee Clause applies only where officer personally benefitted; no allegation of personal gain or special confidential relationship | Dismissed: Trustee Clause inapplicable (no personal gain alleged); no facts showing special/confidential relationship sufficient to create fiduciary duty |
| Whether complaint states invasion-of-privacy (public disclosure of private facts) | Disclosure of SSNs, contact info, and age are private and offensive, causing reputational and emotional injury | Dept: disclosed information does not normally affect reputation nor is it offensive/objectionable to a reasonable person | Dismissed: information disclosed does not normally implicate reputation or meet the "offensive and objectionable" element required for public disclosure tort |
Key Cases Cited
- Dept. of Transp. v. Montgomery Tank Lines, 276 Ga. 105 (broad statutory waiver language) (2003) (cited re: breadth of GTCA waiver)
- Rasnick v. Krishna Hospitality, 289 Ga. 565 (statutory/common-law duty precedent) (2011)
- Bradley Center, Inc. v. Wessner, 250 Ga. 199 (lead opinion disapproved) (1982) (disapproved to extent it stated a general duty "to all the world not to subject others to an unreasonable risk of harm")
- Cottrell v. Smith, 299 Ga. 517 (definition and elements of public disclosure tort) (2016)
- Bullard v. MRA Holding, LLC, 292 Ga. 748 (overview of invasion-of-privacy torts) (2013)
- City of Columbus v. Georgia Dept. of Transp., 292 Ga. 878 (Trustee Clause application limited to personal financial benefit) (2013)