Ekarika v. City of East Point
Decision Date | 30 June 1992 |
Docket Number | No. A92A1126,A92A1126 |
Parties | EKARIKA v. CITY OF EAST POINT et al. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
William J. Deangelis, for appellant.
Barnhart, O'Quinn & Williams, Steven D. Barnhart, for appellees.
Ita Wilson Ekarika (plaintiff) instituted an action against the City of East Point ("East Point") and Officer Homer Peter Miller of the East Point Police Department, alleging that Officer Miller, acting within the scope of his employment, negligently drove an East Point police car into plaintiff's vehicle. 1 East Point filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, arguing OCGA § 36-33-3 bars plaintiff's respondeat superior claim. This Code section provides as follows: "A municipal corporation shall not be liable for the torts of policemen or other officers engaged in the discharge of the duties imposed on them by law." Plaintiff cited OCGA § 33-24-51(b), arguing that East Point waived immunity under OCGA § 36-33-3 to the extent of coverage under a motor vehicle liability insurance policy covering Officer Miller's alleged negligent acts.
The trial court granted the motion for judgment on the pleadings and entered, in pertinent part, the following order: The trial court certified this order for immediate review. This appeal followed the grant of plaintiff's application for interlocutory appeal. Held:
OCGA § 33-24-51(b) provides, in pertinent part, as follows:
In the case sub judice, there is no dispute that East Point purchased motor vehicle liability insurance covering the alleged negligent acts of Officer Miller. However, East Point contends its immunity under OCGA § 36-33-3 is not waived to the extent of said insurance because OCGA § 36-33-3 is not a governmental immunity statute and is therefore not subject to the waiver of immunity provision of OCGA § 33-24-51(b). In support of this position, East Point relies on Welch v. Douglas County, 199 Ga.App. 269, 404 S.E.2d 450, where it was held that the purchase of liability insurance did not constitute a waiver of the immunity provisions of the Recreational Property Act, OCGA § 51-3-20 through § 51-3-26.
In Welch v. Douglas County, supra, plaintiff sued Douglas County after stepping on a nail at a county ball field. Summary judgment was entered for the county based on liability limiting provisions of the Recreational Property Act. This Court held that the county did not waive protection under the Recreational Property Act by purchasing liability insurance, reasoning as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gilbert v. Richardson
...defense of sovereign immunity. See Revels v. Tift County, 235 Ga. 333, 334, 219 S.E.2d 445 (1975); Ekarika v. City of East Point, 204 Ga.App. 731, 732-33, 420 S.E.2d 391 (1992); Hicks v. Walker County School Dist., 172 Ga.App. 428, 323 S.E.2d 231 (1984). Section 33-24-51(b) waives only the ......
-
Brantley v. Jones
...on them by law." Specifically, the city argues that OCGA § 36-33-3 is not an immunity statute, but see Ekarika v. City of East Point , 204 Ga. App. 731, 733, 420 S.E.2d 391 (1992) (holding that OCGA § 36-33-3 is a "governmental immunity statute"), and therefore the shield from liability est......
-
Weaver v. City of Statesboro, A07A2066.
...of Thomaston v. Bridges.10" Williams, supra, 242 Ga.App. at 810(3), 531 S.E.2d 734. See McLemore v. City Council of Augusta;11 Ekarika v. City of East Point12 (OCGA § 33-24-51(b) waives immunity even for police functions of city). Thus, the City "may be liable for [Officer Saxon's] negligen......
-
Hardigree v. Lofton
...respondeat superior and/or vicarious liability. See Jordan v. City of Rome, 417 S.E.2d 730 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992); Ekarika v. City of East Point, 420 S.E.2d 391 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992); Williams v. Solomon, 531 S.E.2d 734 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000); McLemore v. City Council of Augusta, 443 S.E.2d 505 (Ga......