Watkins v. Latif
323 Ga. App. 306
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Lanier Watkins sued police officer Usman Latif for false imprisonment after a stop-sign arrest and Latif was granted summary judgment on official immunity.
- Latif testified he followed Watkins after a stop-sign violation, Watkins exited his car, approached his house, and Latif called for backup.
- Latif completed Watkins’ license and insurance, issued a ticket for the stop-sign violation, and requested Watkins sign the ticket.
- Watkins was on a 911 call; he refused to sign, was asked to step out, and was arrested for stop-sign violation and failure to sign.
- Watkins argued the arrest was ministerial; the trial court held Latif acted in a discretionary capacity and had official immunity.
- On appeal, the court applied de novo review and affirmed the grant of summary judgment for Latif, relying on discretionary-arrest doctrine and malice requirements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Latif’s arrest was discretionary or ministerial | Watkins asserts arrest was ministerial under OCGA §40-13-2.1 | Latif asserts arrest was discretionary, protected by official immunity absent malice | Arrest was discretionary; Latif entitled to official immunity |
| Whether malice or intent to injure was shown to defeat immunity | Watkins argues possible retaliation for calling 911 shows malice | Latif argues no malice shown; immunity remains if discretionary action lacks malice | No evidence of actual malice; immunity upheld |
| Effect of OCGA §40-13-2.1 and Torres on arrest authority after issuing a ticket | Watkins relies on Torres to claim no discretion to arrest after signing/not signing | Torres distinguished; here officer complied with notice requirements, discretion remains | Torres inapplicable to this factual scenario; discretion retained |
| Whether Watkins’ ministerial-duty claim defeats immunity | Watkins contends officer had ministerial duty not to arrest for not signing | Latif acted within discretionary authority; no ministerial breach shown | Ministers’ duties not violated; immunity affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Cameron v. Lang, 274 Ga. 122 (2001) (public officers immune for discretionary acts absent malice)
- Taylor v. Waldo, 309 Ga. App. 108 (2011) (discretionary acts protected to preserve judgment independence)
- Torres, 290 Ga. App. 804 (2008) (notice requirements for signing a ticket; exchange about signing and bond; distinguishes when arrest is improper)
- Reese v. City of Atlanta, 261 Ga. App. 761 (2003) (even flawed investigations can leave discretionary decisions as such)
- Merrow v. Hawkins, 266 Ga. 390 (1996) (actual malice requires more than implied malice)