Here’s what the Supremes held:

OCGA § 32-4-93(a) does not independently waive municipal immunity. The road-defect statute limits liability but it does not create a standalone waiver. Any waiver must come from another source.

OCGA § 36-33-1(b)‘s ministerial duty waiver is geographically limited. A city’s duty to keep streets reasonably safe for ordinary travel applies only to areas intended for travel. It does not apply to shoulders or rights-of-way outside the travel lanes. (This, to me, is the tough pill to swallow.)

This decision considerably narrows the path to recovery in municipal premises cases. Going forward, plaintiffs pursuing road-defect claims against Georgia cities must carefully analyze where the dangerous condition was located relative to the travel lanes and not simply whether it was within the right-of-way. The shoulder is now a much harder sell.

That said, the Court left the door open. The case was remanded, and the Changs’ nuisance claim and the question of waiver beyond the city’s insurance policy limits remain unresolved. Nuisance theories in road-hazard cases just became more strategically important.

The dissent by Justices Ellington and Colvin is worth reading. They argued that a city’s ministerial duty should extend to all areas of the street system where the public has a right to travel, including shoulders. That’s a compelling argument that may influence how future courts interpret “intended use.”

Bottom line: Sovereign immunity just got a sharper edge in Georgia. Know where your hazard is before you file. The link to the full opinion is below.