Michael L. Moss v. G4S Secure Solutions (USA), Inc.
2020AP000558
| Wis. Ct. App. | Sep 8, 2021Background
- Moss, an inmate, was transported from Green Bay to Milwaukee by G4S under a contract with Milwaukee County; G4S employee Archibald drove and fell asleep, causing a crash in which Moss (handcuffed and unbelted) was injured.
- Archibald was cited for inattentive driving; Moss sued G4S, Archibald, Benson (a G4S employee) and Milwaukee County (and its insurer), alleging negligence and that the County remained responsible despite the contract.
- The County moved for judgment on the pleadings asserting governmental immunity under Wis. Stat. § 893.80(4).
- Moss argued the County’s duty to ensure safe transport was ministerial (nondelegable) and that the County remained liable for G4S’s negligence; he also later raised a "known danger"/seatbelt argument.
- The trial court granted the County’s motion, finding the County’s functions discretionary and immune; Moss appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of appeal | Moss’s notice was timely because formal party-served notice of entry was not given | County: court’s electronic notice started the 45-day appeal clock | Held for Moss — electronic court notice did not substitute for a party-served notice of entry under Soquet, so appeal was timely |
| Governmental immunity / ministerial duty | County’s duty to ensure safe transport (and supervise contractor) is ministerial and nondelagable; exception to immunity applies | County: transporting inmates and delegating that duty are discretionary functions protected by immunity | Held for County — plaintiff failed to identify a statutory or policy source creating an absolute, non‑discretionary duty; delegation and supervision here are discretionary |
| Known-danger / seatbelt exception | Failure to buckle Moss triggered the known-danger exception and a ministerial duty under seatbelt statute | County: argument not raised below and, in any event, fails if no ministerial duty exists | Held for County — court declined to consider a new argument on appeal and determined the seatbelt theory fails absent a ministerial duty |
Key Cases Cited
- Soquet v. Soquet, 117 Wis. 2d 553, 345 N.W.2d 401 (Wis. 1984) (formal, party-served notice of entry required to trigger appellate time limits)
- Lodl v. Progressive N. Ins. Co., 253 Wis. 2d 323, 646 N.W.2d 314 (Wis. 2002) (defines ministerial-duty exception to governmental immunity and known-danger doctrine)
- Brown Cnty. Sheriff’s Dep’t Non-Supervisory Labor Ass’n v. Brown Cnty., 318 Wis. 2d 774, 767 N.W.2d 600 (Wis. Ct. App. 2009) (sheriff may deputize others to perform prisoner-transport duties)
- Chart v. Dvorak, 57 Wis. 2d 92, 203 N.W.2d 673 (Wis. 1973) (when government entity makes a legislative decision, it must perform ministerial follow-up without negligence)
- Dunn Cnty. v. WERC, 293 Wis. 2d 637, 718 N.W.2d 138 (Wis. Ct. App. 2006) (limitations on requiring delegation of constitutionally protected sheriff duties)
- Kimps v. Hill, 200 Wis. 2d 1, 546 N.W.2d 151 (Wis. 1996) (plaintiff bears burden to show an exception to governmental immunity)
- Schuster v. Altenberg, 144 Wis. 2d 223, 424 N.W.2d 159 (Wis. 1988) (standard for reviewing judgment on the pleadings parallels summary-judgment review)
- Oden v. City of Milwaukee, 361 Wis. 2d 708, 863 N.W.2d 619 (Wis. Ct. App. 2015) (first step in ministerial-duty analysis is identifying the legal source imposing the duty)
- Lister v. Board of Regents of Univ. Wis. Sys., 72 Wis. 2d 282, 240 N.W.2d 610 (Wis. 1976) (public officers generally immune for negligence in discretionary functions)