Richards v. Robinson
339 Ga. App. 729
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Richards (plaintiff) sued Robinson (school bus driver) for negligence after a collision while Richards was turning left from westbound Five Forks Trickum Rd. onto southbound Ronald Reagan Pkwy and Robinson, eastbound in the far-right "right turn only" lane, proceeded straight through the first right-turn intersection and struck Richards.
- The far-right lane contained two right turns: the first led to southbound Ronald Reagan Pkwy, the second to northbound Ronald Reagan Pkwy; the lane’s left border was solid before the first right turn and intermittently marked between the two turns.
- A sign before the first right turn indicated vehicles in the right lane must turn right; Robinson’s right-turn signal was activated before the first right turn but he intended to use the second right turn.
- Both drivers’ signals for their respective lanes were green; Richards paused during his left turn expecting Robinson to turn at the first right turn, but Robinson continued straight and collided with Richards’ vehicle.
- Robinson moved for summary judgment arguing absence/negation of evidence as to duty/breach and that he could lawfully proceed straight in the right lane; the trial court granted summary judgment for Robinson.
- The Court of Appeals reversed, finding triable issues of fact about duty and breach that precluded summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendant pierced Richards’s pleadings by showing absence of evidence or negating an essential element (duty/breach) | Richards relied on road signage/markings to show Robinson had a duty to turn and breached it by proceeding straight and signaling early | Robinson argued signage/markings permit going straight through and his green signal gave him right of way; his evidence negates or disproves duty/breach | Reversed: Robinson did not establish absence of evidence or affirmatively negate duty/breach; triable issues remain |
| Whether vehicles in the far-right lane were required to turn at the first right turn (legal obligation of lane) | Signs/markings (including a "must turn right" sign and crosswalk wording) reasonably support that drivers must turn at the first right turn | Robinson argued signs/markings allow turning at either the first or second right turn and lane markings only forbid lane changes, not straight travel | Rejected as a summary judgment basis: the signage/markings are susceptible to competing reasonable interpretations creating a jury issue |
| Whether Robinson’s use of a right-turn signal before the first right turn precluded Richards from relying on bus position/signal | Richards relied on bus position and signal to gauge Robinson’s intent to turn at the first right turn | Robinson contended even if signal was early it could not have contributed to the collision or altered right-of-way rights | Court held factual dispute exists on whether the signal/position misled Richards and contributed to the collision, precluding summary judgment |
| Whether the trial court impermissibly construed evidence narrowly against Richards at summary judgment | Richards argued the court selectively read depositions and failed to view evidence in his favor | Robinson relied on his interpretation of the record to justify judgment | Court agreed with Richards that the record must be viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmovant; summary judgment was improper |
Key Cases Cited
- McKissick v. Giroux, 272 Ga. App. 499 (applying de novo review and summary judgment standards)
- Lau’s Corp., Inc. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491 (summary judgment appropriate only when no triable issue as to each essential element)
- Booth v. Quality Carriers, Inc., 276 Ga. App. 406 (elements of negligence claim)
- Garrett v. Nationsbank, N.A. (South), 228 Ga. App. 114 (standards for piercing plaintiff’s pleadings on summary judgment)
- Davis v. Piedmont Hosp., 222 Ga. App. 97 (contradictory evidence creates jury issues)