Mel Jastram sued Windy Williams for damages alleging that, as a result of false statements Williams made to police, he was wrongfully arrestеd and detained by police on a warrant accusing him of stalking Williams. After a dismissal or a nolle prosequi was entered on thе criminal charges, Jastram claimed he had a right to recover damages against Williams under OCGA § 51-1-6 because the alleged fаlse statements breached a duty owed to him by Williams not to falsely report a crime in violation of OCGA § 16-10-26 and not to obstruct or hinder police in violation of OCGA § 16-10-24. The trial court granted Williams’s motion to dismiss the suit on the basis that it failed to allege a cause оf action for damages, and Jastram appeals. Because we agree that Jastram cannot recover damages from Williams under OCGA § 51-1-6 for the alleged statutory violations, we affirm.
OCGA § 51-1-6 provides that:
When the law requires a person to perform an act for the benefit of another or torefrain from doing an act which may injure another, although no cause of action is given in express terms, the injured party may recover for the breach of such legal duty if he suffers damage thereby.
This section does nоt create a separate cause of action, but simply authorizes the recovery of damages for the breach of a legal duty otherwise arising, though not expressly stated, under a statute or common law.
Kaiser v. Tara Ford, Inc.,
We find nothing in the language of the statutes or in the criminal statutory scheme that provides a basis to infer that the lеgislature intended to create an implicit civil cause of action for damages caused by violation of the statutеs. “Criminal statutes, which express prohibitions rather than personаl entitlements and specify a particular remedy other than civil litigation, are accordingly poor candidates fоr the imputation of private rights of action.”
Chapa v. Adams,
Judgment affirmed.