Englander v. City of East Point, 50744
| Decision Date | 16 July 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 50744,No. 1,50744,1 |
| Citation | 218 S.E.2d 161,135 Ga.App. 487 |
| Parties | Charles ENGLANDER, Jr. v. CITY OF EAST POINT |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Scott Walters, Jr., East Point, for appellant.
Smith, Robertson & Sparrow, George N. Sparrow, Jr., East Point, George T. Smith, Marietta, for appellee.
Plaintiff in his complaint alleged that the defendant city 'negligently maintained a public street . . . in that said street was a dead end street, with no signs and no barricade' and that as a result of the 'improper maintainence' plaintiff drove his motorcycle off the end of the street damaging his vehicle. The trial court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Held:
It is obvious that plaintiff bases his complaint against the city because of its failure to place signs or barricades on a dead end street which would warn an individual of the character of the street. Deciding whether to erect or not to erect a traffic control sign or to maintain it after installation is an exercise of a governmental function by a municipality and it is not liable for any negligent performance of this function. Town of Fort Oglethorpe v. Phillips, 224 Ga. 834, 165 S.E.2d 141; Arthur v. City of Albany, 98 Ga.App. 746, 106 S.E.2d 347; Lundy v. City Council of Augusta, 51 Ga.App. 655, 181 S.E. 237. Nor would the lack of a sign or barricade fall within the category of a defect or obstruction of the street so as to constitute the function ministerial within Code § 69-303 as the defect or obstructions contemplated by the statute are physical obstructions or defects. Town of Fort Oglethorpe v. Phillips, 224 Ga. 834, 165 S.E.2d 141, supra. The allegations of the complaint disclose with certainty that under any state of the facts which could be proved, the plaintiff would not be entitled to relief. The dismissal of the complaint was correct.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Fairburn v. Cook
...is a statutorily regulated matter, see OCGA § 32-6-50, long acknowledged as a governmental function, see Englander v. City of East Point, 135 Ga.App. 487, 218 S.E.2d 161 (1975), and that the Railroad is statutorily prohibited from installing traffic control devices on its own. See OCGA §§ 4......
-
Columbus v. Preston
...aware of its existence." This was not a case of the failure to exercise a governmental function as found in Englander v. City of East Point, 135 Ga.App. 487, 218 S.E.2d 161 and Hancock v. City of Dalton, 131 Ga.App. 178, 180, 205 S.E.2d 470. This action is not one for the maintenance of a n......
-
McKinley v. City of Cartersville
...McLaughlin v. City of Roswell, 161 Ga.App. 759, 289 S.E.2d 18; Bowen v. Little, 139 Ga.App. 176, 228 S.E.2d 159; Englander v. City of East Point, 135 Ga.App. 487, 218 S.E.2d 161. 2. The trial court also correctly awarded summary judgment to the City on appellant's nuisance claim. Mayor, etc......
-
Tamas v. Columbus
...5, 213 S.E.2d 144 (1975); Hutcheson v. City of Jesup, 132 Ga.App. 84, 207 S.E.2d 547 (1974). However, in Englander v. City of East Point, 135 Ga.App. 487, 218 S.E.2d 161 (1975), the court held, "Deciding whether to erect or not to erect a traffic control sign . . . is an exercise of a gover......