Georgia Department of Transportation v. Cushway

4 Citing cases

  1. Comanche Construction v. Dept. of Transp

    272 Ga. App. 766 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 8 times
    Finding no language in the statute that would prohibit the DOT from delegating its responsibility to a private contractor through a construction contract

    Supra. 240 Ga. App. 464 ( 523 SE2d 340) (1999). See Hubbard, supra at 348-349 (2) (c).

  2. Dept. of Transp. v. Dupree

    256 Ga. App. 668 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 58 times
    In Department of Transportation v. Dupree, 256 Ga. App. 668 (2002), the decedent's family filed suit against the Department of Transportation after the decedent attempted to cross the street at a busy intersection after dark.

    Such affidavit requirement applies to a malpractice action against an engineering professional. Kneip v. Southern Engineering Co., 260 Ga. 409 (2) ( 395 S.E.2d 809) (1990); Dept. of Transp. v. Cushway, 240 Ga. App. 464, 466 ( 523 S.E.2d 340) (1999); Jackson v. Dept. of Transp., 201 Ga. App. 863, 865-866 ( 412 S.E.2d 847) (1991). An expert's affidavit that satisfies this section does not have to unequivocally demonstrate the evidentiary merits of the malpractice claim unless or until the defendant moves for summary judgment and submits evidence demonstrating the plaintiff's claim lacks merit, and may rest upon evidentiary conclusions.

  3. Hubbard v. Dept. of Trans. of Georgia

    256 Ga. App. 342 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 44 times
    Affirming partial summary judgment in favor of the defendant as to the plaintiff's negligence claim asserted under OCGA ยง 51-1-6 because the statutory duties identified by the plaintiff were not mandatory

    "[T]he MUTCD contains standards that fall into mandatory, advisory, and permissive categories." DOT v. Cushway, 240 Ga. App. 464, 465 ( 523 S.E.2d 340) (1999). This Court has recognized that "[t]he MUTCD is not `the exclusive source of engineering and design standards' especially as to permissive and advisory instructions."

  4. Dept. of Transp. v. Dupree

    A02A1573 (Ga. Ct. App. Jun. 3, 2002)

    Such affidavit requirement applies to a malpractice action against an engineering professional. Kneip v. Southern Eng'g Co., 260 Ga. 409 (2) ( 395 S.E.2d 809) (1990); Dept. of Transp. v. Cushway, 240 Ga. App. 464, 466 ( 523 S.E.2d 340) (1999); Jackson v. DOT, 201 Ga. App. 863, 865-866 ( 412 S.E.2d 847) (1991). An expert's affidavit that satisfies this section does not have to unequivocally demonstrate the evidentiary merits of the malpractice claim unless or until the defendant moves for summary judgment and submits evidence demonstrating the plaintiff's claim lacks merit, and may rest upon evidentiary conclusions.