context: Although the Courts recognize a certain degree of judgment and discretion is required for a government employee to transport an individual as part of his or her job, when the actionable conduct occurs during routine driving situations, the driver is not entitled to sovereign immunity.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 84 Va. Cir. 96, 98
citation_a.parenthetical: holding no immunity to an officer who was transporting an inmate in need of prenatal care because the special security risks inherent in transporting a prisoner did not impact the deputy's operation of the vehicle at the time of the accident
citation_a.sentence: See Fitzgerald v. Perry, 84 Va. Cir. 96, 98 (Roanoke County 2012) (holding no immunity to an officer who was transporting an inmate in need of prenatal care because the special security risks inherent in transporting a prisoner did not impact the deputy’s operation of the vehicle at the time of the accident); see also Ferro v. Shifflett, 72 Va. Cir. 298, 303 (Prince William Co. 2006) (reiterating the principle that, “while every person driving a car must make myriad decisions, in ordinary driving situations, the duty of care is a ministerial obligation” in holding a social worker who was transporting a minor runaway was not entitled to sovereign immunity).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 72 Va. Cir. 298, 303
citation_b.parenthetical: reiterating the principle that, "while every person driving a car must make myriad decisions, in ordinary driving situations, the duty of care is a ministerial obligation" in holding a social worker who was transporting a minor runaway was not entitled to sovereign immunity
citation_b.sentence: See Fitzgerald v. Perry, 84 Va. Cir. 96, 98 (Roanoke County 2012) (holding no immunity to an officer who was transporting an inmate in need of prenatal care because the special security risks inherent in transporting a prisoner did not impact the deputy’s operation of the vehicle at the time of the accident); see also Ferro v. Shifflett, 72 Va. Cir. 298, 303 (Prince William Co. 2006) (reiterating the principle that, “while every person driving a car must make myriad decisions, in ordinary driving situations, the duty of care is a ministerial obligation” in holding a social worker who was transporting a minor runaway was not entitled to sovereign immunity).