SUFFOLK, Va. — A lawsuit that argued a person's constitutional rights are violated by speed cameras in Suffolk was dismissed from court recently, setting a precedent that may impact other such cases down the line.
The suit came to Suffolk Circuit Court in August from attorney Tim Anderson representing Curtis Lytle, who received a $100 fine in the mail after being caught on camera allegedly speeding. Anderson has also filed a similar lawsuit in Chesapeake.
Judge Alfred W. Bates III cited established case law that states municipalities are immune from liability when performing governmental functions, but not when exercising proprietary functions. Bates wrote that the regulation of traffic is a governmental function.
"The City is exercising the powers and duties of government conferred by law for the general well-being and benefit of its citizens and it is clearly directed at protecting the general health and safety of pedestrians in those areas -- the touchstone of a governmental function. The Court finds that in utilizing the speed cameras here for traffic control the City is engaging in a legitimate exercise of its police powers."
Bates also rejected Anderson's argument that the use of a third-party vendor to send tickets and collect payment constituted a waiver of the city's sovereign or governmental immunity.