Giles, et al. v. Brown, et al.
| Docket Number: | 2005-CA-01734-COA Linked Case(s): 2005-CA-01734-COA ; 2005-CT-01734-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-12-2006 Opinion Author: IRVING, J. Holding: Affirmed in Part, Reversed & Remanded in Part |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Tort Claims Act - Section 11-46-9(1)(c) - Criminal activity - Reckless disregard Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., SOUTHWICK, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE AND ROBERTS, JJ. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-28-2005 Appealed from: Leake County Circuit Court Judge: Vernon Cotten Disposition: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED. Case Number: 04-CV-212-LE-C |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | ROBERT LEE GILES, ROBERTO GILES, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HIS FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND, ROBERT LEE GILES, AND ANTONIO
GILES, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HIS FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND, ROBERT LEE GILES |
DON H. EVANS |
||
| Appellee: | ROBERT A. BROWN AND LEAKE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS | MICHAEL JEFFREY WOLF |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Personal injury - Tort Claims Act - Section 11-46-9(1)(c) - Criminal activity - Reckless disregard |
| Summary of the Facts: | Robert Giles and Robert Brown, a Leake County constable, were involved in a car accident that left Giles and his sons, Antonio and Roberto, injured. The Gileses sued Brown. The court granted summary judgment on behalf of Brown, and the Gileses appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Tort Claims Act The Gileses argue that section 11-46-9(1)(c) applies, while Brown and Leake County argue that both sections 11-46-9(1)(c) and 11-46-9(1)(d) apply. Section 11-46-9(1)(c) is the applicable section based on the facts of this case. Under section 11-46-9(1)(c), Brown has immunity from liability unless he acted with reckless disregard for the Gileses’ safety and well-being when the Gileses were not engaged in criminal activity. Issue 2: Criminal activity The Giles argues that the offenses to which Giles pleaded guilty, e.g., improper restraints, etc., were not related to the accident and that Antonio and Roberto have not been charged with any criminal counts as a result of the incident. This limitation bars Giles from proceeding with his case, but does not bar his children from proceeding. Despite Giles’ argument that his offenses were not related to the incident, the offenses do bear a causal nexus to Brown’s wrongdoing. Simply put, Giles’ criminal activity was driving on the highway on an ATV and driving with a suspended license, among other offenses. Clearly, if Giles had not been engaged in the criminal activity in question, there would have been no accident. This is especially true of Giles’ decision to proceed down the road away from Brown instead of stopping and receiving a ticket after Brown’s initial stop of him. Unlike their father, Giles’ children were neither charged with, nor convicted of, any crime. While they both admitted that they knew it was against the law for them to be riding the ATV on the highway and riding without their helmets on, this does not rise to the level of criminal activity contemplated by the statute. Issue 3: Reckless disregard The Gileses argue that there was sufficient evidence to produce a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether Brown acted with reckless disregard, either by acting intentionally or acting willfully or wantonly. There was a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether Brown acted with reckless disregard. A witness swore in her affidavit that she felt that “the Constable was following too close to the 4-wheeler with the two children on the back”and that she felt that “Brown was at fault because he tried to use his vehicle to bump the 4-wheeler to make it stop.” The witness’s affidavit and deposition, combined with the other evidence in the case, presented a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether Brown acted with reckless disregard while pursuing Giles. Therefore, summary judgment was improper as to Roberto and Antonio. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
