GATTO v. CITY OF STATESBORO
312 Ga. 164
| Ga. | 2021Background
- Michael Gatto, an 18‑year‑old patron at Rude Rudy’s (a privately owned bar in University Plaza), was beaten by a bouncer, airlifted to a hospital, and later died; the bouncer pled guilty to voluntary manslaughter.
- Rude Rudy’s and other alcohol‑serving businesses in University Plaza were privately owned and operated on leased premises; the City of Statesboro owned no interest in those businesses or the Plaza property.
- Michael’s parents (the Gattos) sued the City and City Clerk Sue Starling for negligence and for maintaining a nuisance, alleging the City knew about underage drinking and frequent violence in the Plaza but failed to act (including failing to hold due‑process hearings on ordinance violations and renewing licenses despite illegal activity).
- The trial court granted summary judgment to the City and Starling, citing sovereign/municipal immunity and, alternatively, intervening criminal acts breaking causation; the Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal of the City based on sovereign immunity.
- The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide the scope of municipal immunity as applied to nuisance claims and affirmed: a city is immune from nuisance liability for conduct originating on property it neither owned nor controlled.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the City can be held liable in nuisance for dangerous conditions originating on private property the City did not own or control | Gatto: City’s pattern of admitting underage drinking and failing to enforce ordinances amounted to creating/maintaining a nuisance that proximately caused Michael’s death | City: Municipal immunity bars nuisance liability for conditions arising on property the City neither owned nor controlled; only the General Assembly can waive immunity | Held: City immune — municipal nuisance liability requires city ownership, control, or acceptance of the property; no Georgia case imposes nuisance liability for property the municipality did not control. |
| Whether the municipal “nuisance doctrine” operates as a judicial exception to constitutional municipal immunity | Gatto: Nuisance doctrine allows recovery despite immunity where municipality creates/maintains a danger to life and health | City: Nuisance liability cannot expand municipal immunity beyond constitutional limits; judge‑made exceptions are invalid where constitution prescribes immunity unless GA waives it | Held: Court treats nuisance doctrine as grounded in the Constitution (takings clause) but reiterates courts cannot expand municipal immunity; only the Legislature may alter immunity’s scope. |
| Whether the City’s discretionary failure to abate a nuisance on private property can give rise to liability | Gatto: Failure to enforce ordinances and to act on known dangerous conditions constitutes actionable maintenance of nuisance | City: Nonfeasance (discretionary failure to act) regarding privately maintained nuisances does not create liability absent control of the property | Held: No liability for discretionary nonfeasance on private property; municipal nuisance liability does not extend to failure to abate nuisances on another’s property. |
| Whether claims against the City Clerk for breach of ministerial duties survive sovereign/municipal immunity | Gatto: Starling negligently failed to schedule due‑process hearings on ordinance violations (ministerial duty) | Starling/City: Immunity shields them, or at least summary judgment on immunity was appropriate | Held: The Court focused its holding on municipal immunity as to the City; it did not decide all issues as to Starling (Court of Appeals had found error in sua sponte dismissal of negligence claim against Starling). |
Key Cases Cited
- Town of Fort Oglethorpe v. Phillips, 224 Ga. 834 (1968) (expanded municipal nuisance doctrine to permit recovery for personal injuries from dangerous municipal conditions)
- City of Thomasville v. Shank, 263 Ga. 624 (1993) (recognized municipal liability for creating or maintaining a nuisance dangerous to life and health)
- Ga. Dept. of Nat. Resources v. Ctr. for a Sustainable Coast, 294 Ga. 593 (2014) (held judge‑made exceptions to sovereign immunity are invalid and tied nuisance doctrine to the Constitution’s takings protections)
- City of Atlanta v. Mitcham, 296 Ga. 576 (2015) (explained the constitutional basis and limits of municipal immunity and the governmental/ministerial distinction)
- City of Atlanta v. Kleber, 285 Ga. 413 (2009) (municipal nuisance liability requires the city to have exercised control over or accepted dedication of the property at issue)