A Georgia Court of Appeals has dismissed a lawsuit filed by a former Georgia Southern University football player, who suffered injuries after his football coach allegedly forced team members to fight one another during practice.
This incident occurred during a spring practice in 2008. Head Football Coach Christopher Hatcher allegedly organized the team in two lines with players facing each other. He then allegedly ordered the players to pair off and fight. Hatcher told the team that he wanted to see “who was tough enough to be on the team” and earn a scholarship, according to the complaint.
Plaintiff Jerome Pelham, a member of the varsity football team at Georgia Southern University, was participating in the drill. He claimed that, during his fight, another player grabbed him by the face mask, jerked him from side to side, and then threw him to the ground. Pelham fell awkwardly, with the other player landing on top of him and his outstretched right leg, resulting in severe, permanent injuries to his right knee and leg.
He ultimately sued the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, claiming negligence, negligent supervision and hiring, and negligence per se based on a state anti-hazing law. A lower court dismissed the lawsuits on sovereign immunity grounds, and the plaintiff appealed to the Georgia Court of Appeals.
The court of appeals focused on the Georgia Tort Claims Act, which allows lawsuits against state officers and employees acting within the scope of their employment. The Act allows such lawsuits as long as they fall within a narrow band of exceptions. Otherwise, they are barred by sovereign immunity.
The plaintiff argued that the state’s anti-hazing law was an exception that would trigger a waiver sovereign immunity. “(T)he tortious act of hazing occurred well prior to the orchestrated fight the moment Coach Hatcher conditioned [Pelham’s] membership, standing and participation in the [Georgia Southern] football team upon participating in the fight.”
The panel of judges disagreed, finding instead that the act that led to “the loss” was assault and battery. In such a case, “the state does not waive its sovereign immunity, even if a private individual would be liable under like circumstances.”
Pelham v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, Ga. Ct. App., No. A13A0027; 5/20/13
To see the full opinion, visit: http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20GACO%2020130520189
