Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Liability Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Milton assembled statewide amicus support as Chang liability case heads to Georgia Supreme Court
Summary
City attorney Ken Gerard told the Milton City Council on Jan. 6 that Milton has asked the Georgia Supreme Court to review a Court of Appeals affirmation of a Fulton County jury judgment in Chang v. City of Milton and that a large, multi‑jurisdiction amicus effort supports the city’s request.
City Attorney Ken Gerard told the Milton City Council on Jan. 6, 2025, that the city has asked the Georgia Supreme Court to review an appellate ruling that affirmed a Fulton County jury judgment in the 2016 fatal crash involving Joshua Chang.
Gerard said the city filed its petition with the Georgia Supreme Court on Dec. 4, 2024, and that a broad coalition — including dozens of Georgia municipalities and statewide associations — has filed amicus briefs urging review and reversal of the Court of Appeals decision. "It is a tragic set of events," Gerard said of the 2016 crash, adding that the city nonetheless has a duty to protect municipal finances.
The case arises from a Nov. 2016 crash in which Gerard said a vehicle left Batesville Road and struck a fixed object placed in the city's right-of-way. Gerard told the council that a Fulton County jury returned a judgment against the city in June 2023 for an amount he described as "well in excess of $30,000,000," and that the Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed that judgment on Sept. 16, 2024. The city is asking the Georgia Supreme Court to review the appellate ruling.
Gerard emphasized why the ruling has statewide implications: photographs in amicus filings show numerous fixed objects in rights-of-way across Georgia — utility poles, monument signs, planters and other features that, while outside the motoring lanes, lie on shoulders adjacent to travel lanes. He said municipalities and utilities fear a legal rule that would treat such long-standing objects as defects that can create municipal liability even where the object has been in place for decades without prior accidents or complaints.
The city attorney said 58 cities joined a multi-city amicus brief and that additional municipalities filed independent briefs; he also cited briefs filed by the Georgia Municipal Association, the International Municipal Lawyers Association, Georgia Power and the Georgia Electric Membership Corporation. Gerard said the participating jurisdictions together represent roughly 2.5 million residents. "I do view this city, its leadership, its mayor, its city manager as instrumental in getting the message out," he told council members.
During a short question-and-answer period, Council member Carol Kirkley asked for clarification about the legal distinction underpinning the appellate decision: "So what you're telling me is that despite the fact that the vehicle left the road, the penalty was because, theoretically, the planter left the right of way," Kirkley said. Gerard replied that the Court of Appeals decision departed from prior precedent by treating a benign, long-standing object on the shoulder — with no prior complaints or collisions — as a defect that could support liability.
Gerard said the city's appellate team and the amicus filings ask the Georgia Supreme Court to take the case and reverse the Court of Appeals decision; he repeatedly noted the city’s effort was driven by concern over the potential statewide consequences of the appellate holding. The Supreme Court has not yet indicated whether it will accept the case for review.
The council did not take further action during the meeting; Gerard concluded the presentation and invited questions from council members.
