Appellant-plaintiff Andrew Dawkins, Sr., father of Caesar Shelton Dawkins, deceased, appeals from the Superior Court of Coweta County’s grant of summary judgment for appellee-defendant John Doe, an alleged hit and run driver, upon the appellant’s complaint for his son’s wrongful death, as amended.1 The State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, the uninsured motorist carrier of decedent’s mother,2 timely answered and counterclaimed for any liability in the John Doe driver, if uninsured, thereafter filing its motion for summary judgment. Because the appellant has produced neither evidence showing that the John Doe driver was negligent nor evidence showing that such driver was the proximate cause of the decedent’s death, we affirm. The evidence shows that at approximately 7:00 a. m. on December 20, 1997, decedent’s body was found on the side of Interstate 85-North, approximately one mile south of Exit 10 in Coweta County. His car was located out of gas on the southbound shoulder of Interstate 85. Appellant alleged that a vehicle driven by John Doe struck the decedent as he was walking for assistance in or near the paved shoulder of the road or emergency lane.3 It was then dark. The weather was foggy, and the decedent was dressed in green. Held :
Summary judgment is proper when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. OCGA § 9-11-56 c. To obtain summary judgment, a defendant need not produce any evidence, but must only show that no evidence supports at least one essential element of the plaintiff’s case. Lau’s Corp. v. Haskins , 261 Ga. 491 405 SE2d 474 1991. Our review of a grant of summary judgment is de novo , and we view the evidence and all reasonable inferences drawn from it in the light most favorable to the nonmovant. Supchak v. Pruitt , 232 Ga. App. 680, 682 503 SE2d1998. To state a cause of action for negligence in Georgia, the following elements are essential: 1 A legal duty to conform to a standard of conduct raised by the law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm; 2 a breach of this standard; 3 a legally attributable causal connection between the conduct and the resulting injury; and, 4 some loss or damage flowing to the plaintiff’s legally protected interest as a result of the alleged breach of the legal duty. Phillips v. South West Mechanical Contractors, Inc. , 254 Ga. App. 144, 145 1 561 SE2d 471 2002; Berry v. Hamilton , 246 Ga. App. 608, 608-609 541 SE2d 428 2000; Tuggle v. Helms , 231 Ga. App. 899, 901 499 SE2d 365 1998. That an accident occurred and a plaintiff suffered injury establishes no basis for recovery unless the plaintiff comes forward with evidence showing that the accident was caused by the defendant’s negligence. Berry v. Hamilton , supra at 609; Cromer v. Hodges , 216 Ga. App. 548 455 SE2d 94 1995.
