Georgia Dept. of Transportation v. Miller

A DOT employee's decision to inspect or not after a storm is not the type of discretionary function contemplated by the Georgia Tort Claims Act, since it is not a policy decision.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Following a jury trial, the Georgia Department of Transportation “DOT” appeals from a verdict in favor of plaintiffs Richard Miller as administrator of the estate of Johnny Miller and Linda Miller Johnny Miller’s surviving spouse, based on their claims arising from the death of Johnny Miller in a single-car crash on a wet roadway. Specifically, DOT asserts as error 1 the denial of DOT’s motion for a directed verdict based on the Georgia Tort Claims Act1 “GTCA”, 2 the admission of testimony from three expert witnesses, 3 the admission of evidence in violation of the parties’ pretrial stipulation, 4 the trial court’s failure to give certain jury charges, and 5 the giving of a jury instruction defining when a body of water is considered “permanent.” For the reasons that follow, we affirm. On appeal following a jury verdict in a civil case, we examine the record in the light most favorable to the verdict and judgment.2 So viewed, the evidence shows that Johnny Miller was killed in a single-car crash after his car hydroplaned on a wet road and landed submerged in a roadside pond, where he drowned. Due to debris blocking a drainage culvert, accumulated rainwater from the pond covered the road. The jury found that DOT failed to properly keep the culvert clear of debris, which caused water to run over the road where Miller lost control of his vehicle and died. After reducing the jury’s verdict pursuant to OCGA § 50-21-29, the trial court entered a judgment in favor of Linda Miller in the amount of $1 million and in favor of Richard Miller in the amount of $507,921.90. DOT now appeals.

1. DOT contends that the trial court erroneously denied its motion for a directed verdict because DOT’s negligence occurred in the performance of a discretionary function by a state employee, which is not subject to the waiver of sovereign immunity under the GTCA. We disagree.

Georgia Dept. of Transportation v. Miller

A DOT employee's decision to inspect or not after a storm is not the type of discretionary function contemplated by the Georgia Tort Claims Act, since it is not a policy decision.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report