COLLINGTON v. CLAYTON COUNTY

Mary Collington was hurt in a car accident with a Clayton County sheriff's deputy who was driving a county-owned patrol car on duty. Thinking the deputy was a city police officer, she sent notice of her claim to the county police chief, the county commissioners, and the district attorney, but not to the sheriff. When she later sued the sheriff in his official capacity, the county argued her case should be thrown out because Georgia law requires anyone suing a county to first present the claim within 12 months, and lower courts had said that notice for a sheriff must go to the sheriff, not the county commission. The Supreme Court of Georgia agreed that this 12-month notice law applies to official-capacity claims against a sheriff for a deputy's careless driving of a county vehicle, because such a claim is really a claim against the county. But it disagreed that notice must go to the sheriff, holding that sending notice to the county governing authority, as Collington did, is enough. The case goes back to the lower courts.

A claim against a county sheriff in his official capacity for a deputy's negligent use of a county-owned vehicle is legally a claim against the county itself, so the 12-month notice statute (OCGA § 36-11-1) applies, and giving notice to the county governing authority, rather than the sheriff personally, satisfies that requirement.

The ruling clarifies that Georgians who plan to sue over a sheriff's deputy's negligent driving of a county car need only notify the county commission within a year, not the sheriff's office. This removes a trap that had caused valid claims to be dismissed on a technicality across Georgia counties.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded

1. The court examined the history of Georgia's claim-notice law (OCGA § 36-11-1), first enacted in 1860, and old cases from that era showing that suing a government official in their official role was understood as suing the government itself.
2. Applying that historical understanding, the court noted sheriffs are county officials under the Georgia Constitution, and counties, not sheriffs personally, pay for judgments and vehicle-accident losses under Georgia's covered motor vehicle statute (OCGA § 36-92-1 and related sections).
3. Because Clayton County owned the patrol car the deputy was driving, any judgment in the case would affect the county's own property or funds, meaning the lawsuit against the sheriff in his official capacity was really a claim against the county, triggering the 12-month notice requirement.
4. The court then looked at decades of Georgia appellate decisions holding that notice under this statute could be given to the county governing authority (the county commission), even though the statute itself does not name who must receive notice.
5. The court overruled recent Court of Appeals decisions that had required notice to go specifically to the sheriff, finding no justification for departing from over a century of precedent allowing notice to the county commission.
6. Because Collington had timely notified the Clayton County Commissioners, the court concluded she satisfied the notice requirement even though she never separately notified the sheriff.

• sheriff liability
• notice of claim
• Clayton County
• government vehicle accident
• sovereign immunity