231 Ga. App. 886 - Coffey v. Brooks County’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably Grech v. Clayton County (2003), 233 Ga. App. 886 - Stone v. Taylor (1998)
4 federal appellate · 19 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Gilbert v. Richardson · 187 Ga. App. 594 - Moore v. Goldome Credit Corp. · City of Rome v. Jordan · Woodard v. Laurens County · Donaldson v. Department of Transportation
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The doctrine of official immunity, also known as qualified immunity, offers public officers and employees limited protection from suit in their personal capacity. Qualified immunity protects individual public agents from personal liability for discretionary actions taken within the scope of their official authority, and done without wilfulness, malice, or corruption. Under Georgia law, a public officer or employee may be personally liable only for ministerial acts negligently performed or acts performed with malice or an intent to injure. The rationale for this immunity is to preserve the public employee's independence of action without fear of lawsuits and to prevent a review of his or her judgment in hindsight.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“(1) an explicit assurance by the municipality, through promises or actions, that it would act on behalf of the injured party; (2) knowledge on the part of the municipality that inaction could lead to harm; and, (3) justifiable and detrimental reliance by the injured party on the municipality’s affirmative undertaking.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rowe v. Coffey“[L]iability does not attach where the duty owed by the governmental unit runs to the public in general and not to any particular member of the public, except where there is a special relationship between the governmental unit and the individual giving rise to a particular duty owed to that individual.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rowe v. Coffey
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.