Dep't of Pub. Safety v. Ragsdale

• Decision Date: 12 November 2020
• Docket Number: A18A1220
• Citation: Dep't of Pub. Safety v. Ragsdale, 357 Ga.App. 739, 851 S.E.2d 236(Mem) (Ga. App. 2020)
• Parties: DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY v. RAGSDALE.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

357 Ga.App. 739

851 S.E.2d 236 (Mem)

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY

v.RAGSDALE.

A18A1220

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

November 12, 2020

Christopher M. Carr, Attorney General, Kathleen M. Pacious, Deputy Attorney General, Loretta L. Pinkston-PopeRobert L. Bunner, Senior Assistant Attorneys General, for Appellant.

Edward V. C. Silverbach, J. Matthew Watson, for Appellee.

Doyle, Presiding Judge.

In Ga. Dept. of Public Safety v. Ragsdale ,¹ this Court affirmed the trial court's determination that OCGA § 9-3-99 tolled the time for giving ante litem notice to the State. The Supreme Court of Georgia granted certiorari, as to whether "the time for filing an ante litem notice under the Georgia Tort Claims Act[² is] subject to tolling under OCGA § 9-3-99."³ Overruling several cases, the Supreme Court determined that OCGA § 9-3-99 did not toll the time for presenting ante litem notice because that provision is not a statute of limitation subject to tolling statutes.⁴ We now adopt the Supreme Court's judgment as our own, and accordingly, vacate the trial court's order and remand for entry of an order in conformity with this opinion.

Judgment vacated and case remanded.

Dillard, P. J., and Mercier, J., concur.

1 347 Ga. App. 827, 821 S.E.2d 58 (2018), reversed by Dept. of Public Safety v. Ragsdale , 308 Ga. 210, 839 S.E.2d 541 (2020).

2 See OCGA § 50-21-26 (a) (1).

3 (Punctuation omitted.) Dept. of Pub. Safety v. Ragsdale , Case No. S19C0422 (decided July 1, 2019) (order).

4 See Ragsdale , 308 Ga. at 213-215, 839 S.E.2d 541.