In November 2016, a tragic incident occurred in the City of Milton. Joshua Chang, a bright and promising college student, was driving down Batesville Road when, for unexplained reasons, his car went into a slide lasting over 60 feet before ultimately colliding with a concrete planter located six feet off the roadway. The collision resulted in the death of Mr. Chang.
This single-car traffic accident began a multi-year dispute, continuing to this day, centered around the planter, which played a role in the tragedy. The ongoing litigation between Mr. Chang's parents and the City of Milton will have lasting impacts and the potential to reshape municipal tort liability in Georgia.
Following the accident, Mr. Chang's parents sought damages against several parties, focusing on the existence and location of the concrete planter. The parents sued the city, alleging that the city was negligent in maintaining the roadway and had created a nuisance with the concrete planter.
During the trial, it was determined that the planter was within the city’s right-of-way, for which the city was responsible. Ultimately, the jury found the city liable and awarded Mr. Chang’s parents over $32 million, which is approximately 85 percent of the city’s annual budget.
The City of Milton appealed the judgment to the Georgia Court of Appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in determining that the city was not entitled to sovereign immunity. Sovereign immunity is a legal doctrine provided for in Article IX, Section II, Paragraph IX of the Georgia Constitution, which protects municipalities from liability for damages.
Cities in Georgia are entitled to sovereign immunity unless waived by the General Assembly. Precedent, including a 2019 case out of the City of Roswell, had consistently held that cities in Georgia had sovereign immunity for incidents which occurred off the roadway in areas not meant for the passage of motor vehicles, but the Milton judgment throws decades of precedent on its head.
In its analysis of the city’s appeal, the Court of Appeals noted that the General Assembly waived municipal sovereign immunity for negligence in the performance of ministerial duties, which are commonly understood as duties that do not require discretionary judgment. Georgia law provides that municipalities may be liable for injuries resulting from defects in public roads if the municipality knew or should have known about the defect. On September 14, 2024, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision, upholding the $32 million judgment against the City of Milton.
The court determined that the planter constituted a defect in the road even though it was off the roadway by several feet and did not impair the normal flow of traffic and, despite no prior incidents, that the city had sufficient notice of this defect. As a result, the court held that the city was not entitled to sovereign immunity.
If left to stand, the Court of Appeals decision in City of Milton v. Chang could have a dramatic impact on cities across Georgia in numerous ways. First, the sheer size of the judgement against the Milton will have profound effects on city governance. This type of verdict, often referred to as a “nuclear verdict,” has the potential to change the landscape of municipal operations.
The demonstration of this potential liability will reshape municipal insurance coverage as cities are now deemed a higher risk. The potential for an entire year’s budget to be at risk will shape how cities operate, and they will have little choice but to pass these added costs to their residents and businesses.
Second, the determination that the planter, in the city’s right-of-way constitutes a defect in the road, greatly expands a city’s duty concerning potential obstacles within their jurisdiction. The planter, located off the road, predated the existence of the city by decades, and had previously never been associated with any incident.
Despite these facts, the courts determined that the city was negligent in not removing this planter as a defect in its roadway due to its constructive knowledge of its existence. If this judgement is allowed to stand, every city’s responsibility will be increased to a level where prudence would require each city to scrutinize all potential obstacles in their right-of-way and remove them. Cities must be on guard of any obstacle in the entire right of way and be wary of any possible incident.
While it is currently unknown whether the Supreme Court of Georgia will grant certiorari to review the Court of Appeals’ decision, if this decision is left to stand, it will greatly and negatively impact Georgia cities.