Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
MOATS Et Al. v. MENDEZ.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided March 14, 2019No. A18A1721Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDoyle, Presiding Judge
Because I believe that Mendez's notice to Polk County satisfied the presentment requirement in OCGA § 36-11-1, I would affirm the trial court's denial of the consolidated motion to dismiss Sheriff Moats and Deputy Allred in their official capacities. With respect to Deputy Allred in her individual capacity, I agree that she is immune under OCGA § 36-92-3 (a).1 Accordingly, I fully concur with Division 1 and respectfully dissent to Division 2.
This case arises in the context of a respondeat superior action against a sheriff and his *815deputy based on the alleged negligence of the deputy in an…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Deal v. ColemanSupreme Court of Georgia · 2013
- Gilbert v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1994
- State v. JacksonSupreme Court of Georgia · 2010
- Strength v. LovettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2011
- HARRISON v. McAFEE Et Al.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2016
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.