Sovereign immunity not waived.

- In an action arising out of an arrest, despite the way the arrestee was treated, the trial court properly dismissed a complaint against a county, and granted summary judgment on the same complaint against a city, on sovereign immunity grounds since the arrestee failed to show that the immunity had been waived. Scott v. City of Valdosta, 280 Ga. App. 481, 634 S.E.2d 472 (2006).

Trial court erred in denying a county's motion for summary judgment in a driver's action alleging that the county was negligent for failing to maintain and repair a roadway or failing to warn of a known hazard because there was no evidence that the county waived the county's sovereign immunity under O.C.G.A. § 36-92-2, and there was no evidence that a county vehicle caused the hole in the roadway; the plaintiff, not the defendants, has the burden of establishing that a county has waived sovereign immunity by purchasing liability insurance protection covering the plaintiff's claim. Effingham County v. Rhodes, 307 Ga. App. 504, 705 S.E.2d 856 (2010).

Trial court erred in denying a county and a county commissioner summary judgment in a driver's action alleging that the county and the commissioner were negligent for failing to maintain and repair a roadway or failing to warn of a known hazard because a suit against the commissioner in the commissioner's official capacity was a claim against the county, and the commissioner could raise any defense available to the county, including sovereign immunity; the driver advanced no argument that an act of the General Assembly specifically waived the sovereign immunity protecting the commissioner. Effingham County v. Rhodes, 307 Ga. App. 504, 705 S.E.2d 856 (2010).

Bus driver failed to show that the waiver of sovereign immunity under O.C.G.A. § 36-92-2(a) for the negligent use of motor vehicles applied to the driver's claims for wrongful discharge, false arrest, and malicious prosecution because the school district's alleged liability for those claims was not predicated upon the school district's negligent use of a motor vehicle. Bomia v. Ben Hill County Sch. Dist., 320 Ga. App. 423, 740 S.E.2d 185 (2013).

Waiver of immunity.

- When a local entity purchases automobile liability insurance in an amount greater than the prescribed limits set forth for a waiver of sovereign immunity under O.C.G.A. § 36-92-1 et seq., the entity waives sovereign immunity to the extent of the entity's insurance coverage as required by O.C.G.A. § 33-24-51(b), and the broad definition of "any motor vehicle" set forth in § 33-24-51 applies. Therefore, in a wrongful death and survivor case, a county waived sovereign immunity to the extent of the county's insurance coverage as required by § 33-24-51(b), and the Georgia legislature did not intend to apply a narrow definition of motor vehicle under O.C.G.A. § 36-92-1 in a case involving an injury caused by a bush hog and a tractor. Gates v. Glass, 291 Ga. 350, 729 S.E.2d 361 (2012).

School district waived immunity to extent of insurance covering school bus accident.

- In a parent's action against a school district for the death of the parent's child as the child tried to board a school bus, although the district had sovereign immunity, the district waived sovereign immunity to the extent of the district's purchase of liability insurance pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 33-24-51(b); the exclusion from the waiver of sovereign immunity for school districts in O.C.G.A. § 36-92-2(a) did not extend to the second sentence of § 33-24-51(b). Tift County Sch. Dist. v. Martinez, 331 Ga. App. 423, 771 S.E.2d 117 (2015), cert. denied, No. S15C1084, 2015 Ga. LEXIS 458 (Ga. 2015).

Negligent use of a city or county owned motor vehicle.

- In a wrongful death action by a decedent's estate and her children against the county sheriff, the sheriff's sovereign immunity was waived pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 36-92-2(a) because the claim of reckless disregard for proper law enforcement procedures in pursuing a fleeing suspect came within the ambit of a claim for negligent use of a city-or county-owned motor vehicle. Strength v. Lovett, 311 Ga. App. 35, 714 S.E.2d 723 (2011), cert. denied, No. S11C1794, 2011 Ga. LEXIS 979 (Ga. 2011).

Purchase of general liability insurance policy waived immunity for injuries from tar machine.

- In a worker's suit alleging negligence on the part of a county with regard to the county allegedly failing to properly instruct and supervise the worker in the use of a portable tar kettle machine, the trial court erred by granting the county's motion for a judgment on the pleadings based on sovereign immunity as the worker sufficiently alleged that the machine was a vehicle as contemplated by O.C.G.A. § 33-24-51, which established a waiver of sovereign immunity if the county purchased liability insurance to cover damages and injuries arising from the use of motor vehicles under the county's management. Hewell v. Walton County, 292 Ga. App. 510, 664 S.E.2d 875 (2008).

Injured driver could establish extent of damages caused by collision.

- Driver's employer's uninsured motorist (UM) coverage was available to the driver because the policy promised to pay sums the driver was "legally entitled to recover" from a UM, even though the driver had collided with a county vehicle and the county's partial sovereign immunity prevented the driver from establishing in a lawsuit that the driver was legally entitled to recover the full amount of the driver's damages from the county. FCCI Ins. Co. v. McLendon Enters., 297 Ga. 136, 772 S.E.2d 651 (2015).

Cited in Weaver v. City of Statesboro, 288 Ga. App. 32, 653 S.E.2d 765 (2007); Bd. of Comm'rs v. Johnson, 311 Ga. App. 867, 717 S.E.2d 272 (2011); Primas v. City of Milledgeville, 296 Ga. 584, 769 S.E.2d 326 (2015).