O'HERON v. Blaney

I believe that the Court incorrectly analyzes the immunity provided to reporters of child abuse by OCGA § 19-7-5, and then fails to consider evidence which makes summary judgment entirely inappropriate in this case.

1. The majority correctly holds that immunity from liability for reporting child abuse “may attach in two ways, either by showing *875that ‘reasonable cause’ exists or by showing ‘good faith [,]’ ” and that, once reasonable cause is established under an objective analysis, a reporter of child abuse “is, by definition, operating in good faith.” (Maj. op. p. 873.) See Warner v. Mitts,…