 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hayes v. Greene County10/25/2005
NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY
DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED: 10/25/2005
BEFORE KING, C.J., IRVING AND BARNES, JJ.
. Ravin Hayes appeals an order granting summary judgment by the Circuit Court of Greene County in her personal injury suit against Greene County. She asserts two issues on appeal, but this Court finds the first issue to be dispositive of the appeal. That issue, as stated by Hayes is:
Greene County is not entitled to absolute immunity under Mississippi Code Annotated § 11-6-9 (1)(q) while conducting garbage pickup operations during hazardous foggy conditions in violation of Mississippi Code Annotated § 63-3-903.
Finding no error, we affirm.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
. At approximately 7:00 a.m., November 26, 2001, Ravin Hayes was traveling southbound on Mississippi Highway 63 in Greene County. Due to heavy fog, visibility was poor. As a result of this poor visibility, Hayes had difficulty seeing a Greene County garbage truck, which was stopped ahead of her on the highway. However, she did see the truck in sufficient time to stop her vehicle and avoid colliding with the truck. Shelly Mitchell was traveling behind Hayes. Mitchell's vehicle struck Hayes' vehicle from the rear. Hayes' neck was broken as a result of the accident. Hayes settled her claim against Mitchell, and subsequently filed suit against Greene County on July 29, 2002. Greene County filed a motion for summary judgment on March 26, 2003, claiming that weather was the sole cause of the accident, and that it was therefore entitled to immunity under Mississippi Code Annotated § 11-46-9 (1)(q) (Rev. 2002). The Greene County Circuit Court granted the summary judgment motion on June 26, 2003. The judge denied Hayes' motion to reconsider on June 9, 2004, and entered a final order granting Greene County's summary judgment motion.
DISCUSSION
. A motion for summary judgment should only be granted when there are no disputed material facts. Robinson v. Singing River Hosp. Sys., 732 So.2d 204, 207 ( 7) (Miss. 1999).The burden of proving the absence of disputed material issues of fact rests upon the moving party. Miller v. Meeks, 762 So.2d 302 ( 3) (Miss. 2000). When faced with a motion for summary judgment, the court isobligated to review all evidentiary matters before it, including admissions in pleadings, answers to interrogatories, depositions, affidavits, etc. Id. In considering whether there exists material disputed facts, the court is obligated to view the facts in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Robinson, 732 So.2d at 206 ( 7). If after having done so, the court finds that the plaintiff would be unable to prove any set of facts, which would support his or her claim, then summary judgment is appropriate. Id.
. On appeal, we review the grant of summary judgment de novo, applying the same standards as the trial court. Massey v. Tingle, 867 So.2d 235, 238 ( 6) (Miss. 2004).
. The trial court found that the weather was the sole proximate cause of this collision, and that under Mississippi Code Annotated § 11-46-9 (1)(q), Greene County was exempt from liability. That statute states: "(1) A governmental entity and its employees acting within the course and scope of their employment or duties shall not be liable for any claim . . .(q) arising out of an injury caused solely by the effect of weather conditions on the use of streets or highways." Miss. Code Ann. § 11-46-9 (1)(q).
. Hayes testified that it was extremely foggy, and that visibility was limited to the approximate length of a vehicle. She noted that the hazard lights on the garbage truck were flashing, and
Page 1 2 Mississippi Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|