In a recent case in front of the Georgia Court of Appeals, Richards v. Robinson, a school bus driver was sued for negligence after a school bus and a car were involved in an accident. The car’s driver was approaching an intersection and began a left turn when the school bus came over a hill toward him. The school bus was driving toward him in a right-turn lane with his blinker on. The car’s driver believed the bus was turning right at the intersection, but the bus driver intended to turn right after the intersection and drove straight through the intersection. The two cars collided.
The bus driver moved for summary judgment in his favor. He claimed the car’s driver failed to present evidence that he acted negligently. The court granted the motion, finding the bus driver demonstrated that there was no issue of material fact as to any essential element of the claim and that he was entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. However, a Georgia appeals court reversed the decision, finding there was a dispute of material fact.
One of the disputes in the case was whether drivers in the right turn lane were required to turn right at the intersection, or whether they could continue and turn at an upcoming right turn that was after the intersection. The court noted that the road sign before the first right turn indicated that vehicles in the right turn lane must turn right. This meant that it may have been negligent for him to drive in that lane when he was not turning until the second turn. The bus driver presented contradictory evidence, but this meant only that it was an issue for a jury. The evidence was sufficient for the car driver to prove the bus driver may have been negligent. As a result, the bus driver was not entitled to summary judgment.