Georgia Supreme Court says city not liable for 2016 traffic death

ATLANTA — The Supreme Court of Georgia has vacated lower-court rulings in a lawsuit that held the city of Milton liable for a 2016 traffic death involving a vehicle that left Batesville Road and struck a large concrete planter set back from the paved roadway.

The case stems from the death of Joshua Chang, who was killed in November 2016 when his vehicle left the road and hit the planter on the shoulder. Chang’s parents sued Milton in Fulton County State Court, arguing the city was negligent for failing to remove what they described as a road “defect” and that the planter amounted to a nuisance.

A jury found Milton liable for negligence and nuisance and awarded more than $32.5 million in damages.

Milton appealed, arguing that the claims were barred by sovereign immunity and that the evidence was insufficient to support a finding of nuisance liability. The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding Milton’s immunity had been waived because maintaining streets in a reasonably safe condition is a ministerial duty and because the planter’s placement within the right-of-way supported treating it as a road defect.

The state Supreme Court took the case to resolve how Georgia statutes governing municipal liability interact in road-defect negligence claims. In a majority opinion by Justice Andrew A. Pinson, the court held that a statute limiting municipal liability for “defects in the public roads” does not itself waive municipal immunity.

The court also narrowed the ministerial-duty waiver, holding that a city’s duty in road-defect negligence cases is limited to keeping safe the portions of streets and sidewalks intended for ordinary travel — meaning the lanes of travel.

Because the record showed the planter was located roughly six feet from the paved roadway in a grassy area not shown to be intended for ordinary travel, the court said Milton’s immunity was not waived for the negligence claim under the ministerial-duty statute. The court’s decision vacated the lower-court rulings and sent the case back for further proceedings.

Justice Verda M. Colvin dissented, joined by Justice John J. Ellington, arguing that existing precedent treats the ministerial duty more broadly and would include areas such as the shoulder where the public has a right to travel.

The majority emphasized the limited scope of its ruling, saying it did not decide whether any other waiver of immunity might apply, did not address the city’s general duty of care, and did not reach the nuisance claim. Chief Justice Nels S.D. Peterson and Justice Benjamin A. Land did not participate.