Scott v. Waits
306 Ga. App. 860
Ga. Ct. App.2010Background
- Waits sued Donnie Scott, Woodland High School’s school resource officer, after Lillian Waits was injured by a gate on school property.
- Gate comprised two sections swinging over the roadway, left open during fall 2007, with a malfunctioning latch.
- Scott moved for summary judgment arguing official immunity; trial court denied.
- Evidence showed Scott claimed no formal ministerial duty to inspect the gate; no policy requiring inspection; principal unaware of any policy.
- Dr. Sabin testified there was no written policy, only a practice; responsibility for gates varied; no daily assignment to secure gates.
- Appellate interlocutory review reversed, holding Scott’s acts were discretionary and he had no ministerial duty to inspect or repair the gate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Scott had a ministerial duty to inspect gates. | Waits contends there was a ministerial duty to inspect. | Scott argues inspection was discretionary, not ministerial. | Discretionary duty; no ministerial duty found. |
| Whether Scott had a duty to report or repair a defective gate. | Waits asserts duty to report/repair gate defects. | Scott lacked a clear, ministerial obligation to report/repair. | No clear ministerial duty shown; discretionary actions. |
| Whether lack of formal policy negates official immunity. | Policy absence does not negate potential ministerial duties. | Absence of formal policy means discretion governs. | No ministerial duty established; immunity applies. |
| Whether evidence shows Scott breached any ministerial duty. | Scott failed to inspect or report defective latch. | No breach of a ministerial duty proven. | No breach proven; trial court erred in denying summary judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kennedy v. Mathis, 297 Ga.App. 295, 676 S.E.2d 746 (2009) (official immunity framework; ministerial vs discretionary distinction)
- Woodard v. Laurens County, 265 Ga. 404, 456 S.E.2d 581 (1995) (discretionary vs ministerial inquiry in immunity analysis)
- Hemak v. Houston County School Dist., 220 Ga.App. 110, 469 S.E.2d 679 (1996) (absence of policy supports discretionary treatment of hazards)
- Lincoln County v. Edmond, 231 Ga. App. 871, 501 S.E.2d 38 (1998) (ministerial duty to remove hazards; policy framework crucial)
- Nelson v. Spalding County, 249 Ga. 334, 290 S.E.2d 915 (1982) (ministerial duties to repair/act when directed; policy guidance needed)
- Brown v. Taylor, 266 Ga.App. 176, 596 S.E.2d 403 (2004) (absence of formal policy leads to discretionary acts)
- Banks v. Happoldt, 271 Ga.App. 146, 608 S.E.2d 741 (2004) (road maintenance duties require policy to be ministerial)