Pettis v. Miss. Transp. Comm'n


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2009-CA-01433-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 09-14-2010
Opinion Author: Roberts, J.
Holding: Affirmed.

Additional Case Information: Topic: Personal injury - Tort Claims Act - Discretionary function - Section 65-1-61 - Section 11-46-9(1)(d)
Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ.
Procedural History: Summary Judgment
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 08-17-2009
Appealed from: Hancock County Circuit Court
Judge: Roger T. Clark
Disposition: SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED IN FAVOR OF MISSISSIPPI TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
Case Number: 04-0356

  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: Linda Pettis, Beverly Ladner, Donnie Cuevas, Jr., Amy Cuevas, Blair Schuman, Individually and By and Through her Next Friend and Natural Guardian, her Mother, Amy Cuevas, and Daemon Cuevas, Jr., Individually and By and Through his Next Friend and Natural Guardian, his Father Donnie Cuevas, Jr.




JIM DAVIS, IAN AVERY BRENDEL



 
  • Appellant #1 Brief

  • Appellee: Mississippi Transportation Commission STEPHEN GILES PERESICH, JACKYE C. BERTUCCI, JOHANNA MALBROUGH MCMULLAN  

    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 - Discretionary function - Section 65-1-61 - Section 11-46-9(1)(d)

    Summary of the Facts: While driving with five passengers, Linda Pettis lost control of her car and crashed into a tree. According to Pettis, she lost control of her car because of the manner in which rainwater collected in ruts in the asphalt on the highway. Pettis and all five passengers sued the Mississippi Transportation Commission. MTC denied liability and subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment which the court granted. Pettis and the passengers appeal.

    Summary of Opinion Analysis: Pettis argues that the court erred in finding that MTC was entitled to immunity based on the Tort Claims Act’s provision regarding discretionary functions. To determine whether an act or a failure to act is a discretionary function, the court considers whether the activity involved an element of choice or judgment, and if so whether the choice or judgment in supervision involves social, economic or political policy alternatives. Conduct will be considered ministerial, and, therefore, immunity will not apply, if the obligation is imposed by law leaving no room for judgment. Section 65-1-61 does not impose any specific directives as to the time, manner, and conditions for carrying out the MTC’s duty in maintaining highways or posting traffic-control or warning devices; thus, the duties are not ministerial in nature. There is no genuine issue of material fact that repairing depressions in highways falls within the MTC’s duty to maintain state highways. The MTC is required to exercise its discretion when applying its limited allocated resources toward that maintenance. Pettis argues that the MTC had knowledge of the dangerous condition of the depressions in the highway, because there had been a fatal accident in the vicinity of the area in which Pettis lost control of her car. She also notes that the MTC was aware that the highway needed to be resurfaced. However, because the ordinary-care standard does not apply to claims that fall under section 11-46-9(1)(d), there was no determination to be made by the fact-finder.


    Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court